The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04/21/2009 PACKET(DRAFT) AGENDA Regular Meeting - Bremerton Planning Commission (Subject to PC approval) April 21, 2009 5:30 P.M. th 345 – 6Street Meeting Chamber – First Floor I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL (quorum present) III. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA IVAPPROVAL OF MINUTES: March 17, 2009 Regular meeting. o V. PUBLIC MEETING A. Call to the Public: Public comments on any item not on tonight’s agenda B. Public Hearing 1. Manette Sub-Area Plan VI. BUSINESS MEETING A. Chair Report: Chairman Wheeler B. Director Report: Andrea Spencer. C.Old Business: D.New Business VII. ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is May 19, 2009 Planning Commission meeting packets are available on-line at www.ci.bremerton.wa.us DRAFT FOR APPROVAL ON 4/21/09 Minutes for City of Bremerton Planning Commission Regular Meeting March 17, 2009 I. Call to Order Chairman Wheeler The meeting was called to order by at 5:30 p.m. II. Roll Call Those present were: Commissioner Cockburn, Commissioner Kosusko, Commissioner Mosiman, Commissioner Streissguth, and Chairman Wheeler. Quorum certified. Also present: Andrea Spencer, Nicole Ward, and Pam Bykonen (DCD staff), and Larry Matel, City of Bremerton Managing Engineer. III. Approval of Agenda Chairman WheelerA motion was made by Commissioner Kosusko introduced the agenda. and seconded by Commissioner Mosiman to approve the agenda as presented. It was agreed by general consensus to approve the agenda as presented. IV. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the Regular Meeting held on January 20, 2009 were presented for approval by A motion was made by Commissioner Cockburn and seconded by Chairman Wheeler. Commissioner Mosiman to approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of January 20, 2009 as presented. Called for a vote: Commissioner Cockburn: Yes; Commissioner Kosusko: Abstain; Commissioner Mosiman: Abstain; Commissioner Streissguth: Abstain; Chairman Wheeler: Yes. The motion carried. VI. Public Meeting A.Call To The Public. (public comments on any item not on tonight’s agenda) Chairman Wheeler asked if there were any comments from citizens. Seeing none, he closed this portion of the meeting. 1.Workshop – Stormwater Management Plan Update: Larry Matel, City of Bremerton Managing Engineer, gave a presentation of the update of the City of Bremerton’s Stormwater Management Plan. Using PowerPoint, Larry reviewed the key points of the update including current practice, retrofitting existing facilities, low impact development methods, and future funding. Planning Commission Meeting March 17, 2009Page 1 of 4 DRAFT FOR APPROVAL ON 4/21/09 Commissioner Kosusko commented that many of the items that were highlighted in the Larry presentation were not included in the Executive Summary. explained that this was the first working draft and it would be more polished before the final version is presented for adoption. Andrea reminded the Commission that this update will be on the 2009 Comprehensive Plan amendment docket. 2.Workshop – Zoning Code Amendment Work Plan: Nicole Ward, City Planner, gave a presentation of discussion items in preparation for the potential zoning code amendments. Items for discussion were: home occupations, revising permit notification requirements, revising the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) exemption levels, parking requirements, updating the Non-conforming Structures/Uses chapter in the zoning code, allowing Doggy Daycares, and allowing small scale wind turbines within the city. Commission comments were: Permit Notification Requirements Commissioner Kosusko agreed that the way the City notifies citizens of upcoming projects needs to be more modern and internet savvy while continuing to accommodate people who are not familiar with using the internet. Andrea added that the goal of revising the requirements was not to reduce the number of notifications but to change the required language to make the notices more concise and efficient. Revising SEPA Exemption Levels Commissioner Streissguth expressed concern regarding changing the SEPA exemption levels without more information on if these changes would compromise an environmental Nicole review. agreed that more research is needed, but in the past ten years the planning staff has issued only Determinations of Non-Significance on projects within the proposed exemption levels. Staff feels it would make sense to find out what other jurisdictions are requiring and to look at where SEPA levels could match other permit requirements such as number of lots created; projects on shorelines would still require environmental review unless they are residential. “Doggy Daycare” Commissioner Cockburn relayed the contentious history of too many animals within his own neighborhood and his own reserves on allowing a daycare for dogs in a residential Andrea area. assured the commission that a staff proposal for this would likely be to Commissioner Kosusko only permit this use in commercial oriented zones. added that daycares for children are regulated whereas daycares for animals are not, although overall he approved of animal daycares within commercial zones. Revising Home Occupation Requirements Commissioner Streissguth felt that the city should be proactive in anticipating a potential increase in home occupation permit requests as the economy continues to shift downward. With the implementation of “TI-No Work” permits which provide inspection requirements, the commission agreed that list of home occupations requiring a higher cost Conditional Use Permit could be reviewed and updated. It was suggested to not list Planning Commission Meeting March 17, 2009Page 2 of 4 DRAFT FOR APPROVAL ON 4/21/09 specific occupations but rather the impact the occupation could have on the neighborhood. Parking Requirements While acknowledging the frustration of current parking in older residential areas, the commission agreed there should be a distinction between existing residential structures Commissioner Streissguth and new structures when determining parking requirements. agreed with expanding the use of parking analyses for commercial parking requirements. Commissioner Kosusko cautioned against using parking analysis when a commercial developer wants increased parking. Chairman Wheeler closed the Public Meeting. VI. Business Meeting Chairman’s Report:Chairman Wheeler A.reported he had attended the most recent Manette Sub-Area Plan community meeting and the process is continuing. Director’s Report: Andrea Spencer, Director of Community Development, B.began her report with an update on the Manette Sub-Area Plan. The City is experiencing a budget shortfall for 2009 and one of the cuts made was the professional services contract with Makers Architects who were hired to complete the Manette plan which will be completed by city staff instead. Through the community meetings it was established that the residents of Manette desired a plan that is very similar to the current Neighborhood Commercial Corridor (NCC) zoning that is already in place. Staff will incorporate those guidelines into the Manette Sub-Area Plan and would like to move forward to hold a public hearing at the April Planning Commission meeting with adoption by City Council CommissionerStreissguth in May. asked for a workshop on this item before holding the public hearing. SKIA North became part of Bremerton on March 1, 2009, and SKIA South is scheduled for inclusion on April 1, 2009. As these annexations have proceeded, more landowners in the middle SKIA area have expressed interest in annexing into the City of Bremerton. Staff will be contacting the remaining SKIA landowners to see if they would be like to be included in the next annexation process. Bremerton is poised to begin work on the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) update which is due in 2012. Staff is in the initial stages of talking with other local jurisdictions and the Department of Ecology to determine where a collaborative approach among jurisdictions may make sense on this effort. She reminded the Commission that the 2007 updates to the Shoreline Master Program had been rejected by the Department of Ecology because they are not accepting minor amendments, and they would have to be included in the major update to the SMP in 2012. Old Business:None C. New Business: Community Development Block Grant staff D. requested a representative from the Planning Commission for the Citizens Advisory Committee which determines Planning Commission Meeting March 17, 2009Page 3 of 4 DRAFT FOR APPROVAL ON 4/21/09 the allocation of funds to local agencies. Commissioner Mosiman volunteered for the appointment. In the event he would not be able to participate, it was suggested Commissioner Hoell may fill in, and should those appointees not work the Commission suggested that Commissioner Kennedy be assigned. VII. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 7:26 p.m. The next Regular Meeting is scheduled for April 21, 2009. Respectfully submitted by: _______________________________________ Andrea Spencer, Executive Secretary Approved by: _______________________________________ Greg Wheeler, Chairman Planning Commission Meeting March 17, 2009Page 4 of 4 Commission Meeting Date: April 21, 2009 Agenda Item V.B.1 CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing on Comprehensive Plan & Zoning Code Amendments to Adopt the Manette Sub Area Plan DEPARTMENT: Department of Community Development PRESENTED BY: Lindsey Sehmel, City Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2008 City Council funded work on a Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan to ensure that future redevelopment of the neighborhood is coordinated and well designed. Enclosed for Planning Commission review is a Draft of the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan. The Commission will conduct a public hearing during the April 21, 2009 regularly scheduled meeting. The Sub Area Plan includes two primary components: 1) An amendment to the 2004 Bremerton Comprehensive Plan adding the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan. 2) Development regulations for the Manette Neighborhood Center that will function as zoning upon Plan adoption. The Draft Plan addresses the desires of the community to keep heights at 35’, establishes a maximum building size of 15,000 SF, and designates street typologies and preferred streetscapes. The plan also sets the plan boundaries, zoning designations, and expected growth patterns. Extensive community and stakeholder meetings were held on the Sub Area Plan between the summer of 2008 and the present. The community members with varying views worked together to determine the development standards within the plan and came to develop the final boundaries and zoning designations that are presented in the plan that is now before the Planning Commission for Public Hearing & Recommendation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff advises the Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing, consider public testimony, and formulate a recommendation to the City Council for adoption of the Manette Sub Area Plan and a text amendment to Chapter 20.80 of the Title 20 Zoning Code to activate the development standards of the Manette Sub Area Plan. MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION Move to recommend that the City Council adopt the Manette Sub-Area Plan as presented in Attachment I, based on the Findings and Conclusions in Attachment II. The Planning Commission recommends that the Comprehensive Plan be amended to make reference to and incorporate the Manette Sub-Area Plan and amend the Zoning Code Chapter 20.80 to activate the development regulations of the Plan, as shown in the draft ordinance in Attachment III. 1 INTRODUCTION The Manette Sub Area Plan is a detailed planning document that fits within the framework of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan. Extensive outreach efforts between city staff, key communicators and the neighbors helped utilize the community as the primary architect/ drafter of the plan. It was determined early on that this plan needs to address the ability to preserve the charm and eclectivity found in the single family neighborhood. Residents, Property Owners and Business owners were all highly active in the development of the plan. In every best effort to create a well balanced plan the community was able to move past differing views and look at what truly was a need, desire, and want for the future of Manette. ANALYSIS The basic requirements for a Sub Area Plan are met and exceeded as follows. Comprehensive Plan Consistency – The Manette Sub Area Plan meets many goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as found in Part II of the Sub Area Plan. As with other Sub Area Plans, overall development intensity called for in the Sub Area Plan is not expected to exceed the threshold evaluated at the time of the Comprehensive Plan - in fact the communities’ desire was to keep with the current types of development patterns and not increase the intensity of development within the neighborhood outside of the expected growth of the Comprehensive Plan. The 2004 Comprehensive Plan designated the Manette Neighborhood Center as a future growth center for the City with an expected a 20-year growth rate of 240 residential units and a high employment allocation of 173 new jobs for the center. Based on the community desires for this neighborhood center, and the limited area established for growth, it is expected that the development that will occur in this center will be modest in nature. In the 2004 Comprehensive Plan it established the citywide growth expectations, and these targets were allocated to each of our individual centers. As we create sub-area plans it is anticipated that we revisit these centers growth expectations and fine-tune them as we gather more neighborhood- specific information that we didn’t have during the 2004 Comprehensive Plan update. As a result we expect with each plan adoption that the allocations will change, and this should not be of concern to the Commission as the City is evaluated on a citywide basis as to whether or not we are meeting our targets. The table below summarizes our estimates of how we are achieving our growth targets to date: 20 Year Growth Allocations of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan CenterPlannedResidentialExpected Residential Difference UnitsUnits Manette240111-129 Bay Vista 605875270 Northwest Corporate 0588588 Campus Downtown Bremerton 605801196 Eastpark42045434 Total959 Public Participation Process –The Plan utilized wide community input and outreach efforts to find an acceptable document for adoption consideration. The City, along with the Key Communicators hosted 5 public open houses and a wide range of key communicator meetings were also held over the course of 6 months within the community. The Key Communicators widely utilized the tools found 2 within the ‘Meeting in a Binder’ to share, educate, and inform the community. Allowing, extensive community input to be integrated throughout the plan. With the high level of dedication from the community, City staff was able to vastly integrate the desires of the community into the plan through the use of the goals, visions, and plan expectations that were prioritized throughout the public meetings. Development Standards – The developments standards found within Part III of the Sub Area Plan were presented and reviewed by the community during our March 30, 2009 open house. The community desired to keep zoning similar to the Neighborhood Commercial Core (NCC) and the R- 10* that was designated in the 2005 zoning update. It was requested to make some minor modifications to keep with the charm that Manette produces. Reduce building size from 20,000 square foot floor plate to 15,000 square feet gross floor area. Buildings heights will be measured to maximum height of roof peak. Buildings within the MCC that are adjacent to LDR zoning are required to have a 10’ setback, and additional stories require a 20’ setback. Street Typologies – The Sub Area Plan includes a series of typologies for streets and introduces a systems approach for the neighborhood street grid within Manette. Each street is assigned a ‘type’ based on its characteristics. And for each ‘type’ a desired set of streetscape standards are identified. With new development and through city-initiated projects, streets in Manette will be upgraded according to the typologies over time. The overall focus on street typologies is pedestrianization and multi-modal options. Further discussion is available within Part III of the Plan. SEPA Adoption of development regulations and amendments to the Comprehensive Plan require evaluation of environment impacts through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) process. Because the Sub Area Plan is an area-wide land use action tied to an overall plan (not site-specific) SEPA review is treated as a “non-project action”. The City issued a SEPA Determination of Non-Signifigance (DNS) for the Plan on April 3, 2009. The action does not have a significant impact on the environment because the threshold of development is within the intensity already evaluated at the time of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Statement. No significant development capacity is being added. The DNS on the non-project action requires statutory notice, review and appeal periods which the City will complete by April 18, 2009. OPTIONS 1. Hold a Public Hearing on the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan and recommend as drafted. Based on the findings in Attachment II 2. Hold a Public Hearing on the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan & amend the plan & revise the findings in Attachment II 3. Continue Public Hearing and Deliberation to future date. 4. Move to Not Recommend Plan. ATTACHMENTS Attachment I: Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan Attachment II: Findings and Conclusions Attachment III: Proposed Ordinance for City Council Attachment IV: Record of Comments since 4/21/09 3 Attachment I FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan I. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Project Description The Manette Sub Area Plan covers 34 acres on the Manette Peninsula. The Sub Area Plan includes two primary components: 1) an amendment to the 2004 Bremerton Comprehensive Plan adding the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan and, 2) development regulations for the Manette Neighborhood Center that will function as zoning upon Plan adoption. The Manette Neighborhood Center was designated in the City’s 2004 Comprehensive Plan. While the Comprehensive Plan calls for Manette to become a neighborhood center, an urban design strategy for the neighborhood had not been developed at the time of the 2005 zoning code adoption, in the interim a ‘stopgap’ zoning scenario was put in place for the neighborhood. City Council funded work on a Manette Sub Area Plan in the 2008 budget to ensure that future redevelopment of the neighborhood is coordinated and well designed. The Manette Sub Area Plan is a detailed planning document that fits within the framework of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan. This is the most established and already- developed neighborhoods designated as a “Neighborhood Center” in the Comprehensive Plan and expected to have a Sub-Area plan developed for it. The Sub Area Plan meets many goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and implements the vision laid out within it. 2. Procedural History A public participation process for the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan has been ongoing since late summer of 2008. The Sub Area Plan includes documentation of the public participation process (Part II). In summary, four public open houses were held and a wide range of community meetings were held. Key Communicators were utilized to help present the needs and goals of the Sub Area Plan. Additionally, the Plan was presented and discussed at Planning Commission. Extensive Community input is integrated throughout the plan, meeting and exceeding state requirements. Public Meetings: 2a.1 January 12, 2009 – General Open House 2a.2 January 26, 2009 – Needs Assessment Charrette 2a.3 February 23, 2009 – Geographic Application Charrette 2a.4 March 16, 2009 – Development Standards & Street Charrette 2a.5 March 30, 2009 – Draft Plan Review Procedural Notices: 2b.1 On March 31, 2009 staff notified the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development of the intent to adopt amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Attachment I 2b.2 On April 3, 2009 Staff notified the Department of Ecology of the issuance of a Determination of Non Significance for the Manette Sub Area Plan. 2b.3 On April 11, 2009 a notice of Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Kitsap Sun and the public was invited to comment. 2b.4 On April 21, 2009 Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan. 3. Public Comment 3.1 Individuals submitting written comments: th a. John Strauss & Angie Kissler – 2317 E 17 ST, Bremerton WA 98310 b. Ryan Malane – 1149 Scott Avenue, Bremerton WA 98310 c. Jane Rebelowski – 1153 Scott Avenue, Bremerton WA 98310 d. Richard Bruskrud – 1102 Shore Drive, Bremerton WA 98310 e. Jeffery A. Hecker – 225 Shore Drive, Bremerton WA 98310 f. Carolyn J. Maxon – 1142 Scott Avenue, Bremerton Wa 98310 3.2 Individuals providing verbal testimony at Planning Commission public hearing: a. To be inserted following public hearing 4. SEPA Determination A Determination of Non Significance (DNS) was issued on April 3, 2009 with an appeal deadline of April 18, 2009. 5. Consistency Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan shall meet the decision criteria outlined in BMC 20.10. The Planning Commission may recommend, and the City Council may adopt or adopt with modifications, an amendment to the comprehensive plan if the criteria outlined below are met. The proposal is to add the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan to the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan as an amendment, providing more specific and detailed planning for the region. And, additionally amending the zoning code to activate the development standards contained within the plan. 5.1 BMC 20.10.080(a) allows amendments to the Comprehensive Plan if there is an obvious technical error in the pertinent comprehensive plan provisions. - Not applicable to this project. 5.2 BMC 20.18.020 (d) (1) allows amendments to the Comprehensive Plan if it is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The adoption of the Manette Sub Area Plan makes minor changes to the comprehensive plan. Changing the boundaries of the plan area and designating new zones within the boundary. The Plan is consistent with the goals and visions of the Comprehensive Plan, as described below and described in detail in the Sub Area Plan document itself. Community Character : CC1B, CC2, CC2B, CC2C, CC2E, CC3 CC3A, CC3B, CC3C, CC4. Land Use Policies : LU1F, LU1K, LU1L, LU4, LU4A, LU4B, LU9E. Housing Policies : H3, H3C, H4, H7, H7D, H8, H8C, H8D. Transportation Element : T2B, T2C, T3D, T4, T4A, T4C, T12, T12B. Environmental Element : E8B, E10B, E11C, E11D. Economic Development Element : EC1J, EC2, EC2C. City Services Element : CS8, CS15A, CS17B. Attachment I 6. Amendment to the Zoning Code An amendment to the Zoning Code, BMC 20.80.080 Master Development, is proposed to accompany adoption of the Manette Sub Area Plan. This amendment adds a reference to the Manette Sub Area Plan, thereby activating the development standards contained in the Plan as the zoning for the Manette Neighborhood. Zoning code text amendments shall meet the decision criteria outlined in BMC 20.18.020 (d). The Planning Commission may recommend, and the City Council may adopt or adopt with modifications, an amendment to the zoning code text if the criteria outlined below are met. 5.3 (1) 20.18.020 allows amendments to the Zoning Code if it is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. See discussion in 5.2 above for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and Part II of the Sub Area Plan. The Manette Sub Area Plan is fully consistent with the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan. 5.3 (2) 20.18.020 allows amendments to the Zoning Code if it does not conflict with other City, state and federal codes, regulations and ordinances. The Manette Sub Area plan does not conflict with any other regulations. II. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings above, Planning Commission concludes that the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan has met the criteria for amendments to the plan as detailed in BMC 20.10.080 and therefore recommends adoption by the City Council. Respectfully submitted by: _____________________________ Executive Secretary Approved by: _____________________________ Bill Mosiman, Chair ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ Ûî×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØù×ÎÈ×Ê ùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃùÔÛÊÛÙÈ×Ê ìÐÛÙ×ÉÖÍÊì×ÍÌÐ× æÓÚÊÛÎÈùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃùÍÊ× ìðûîîóîõùíïïóééóíîô÷ûêóîõøêûöèûìêóð ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ MAYOR CARY BOZEMAN CITY COUNCIL Cecil McConnell, District 2, President Nick Wofford, District 9, Vice-President Brad Gehring, District 1 Adam C. Brockus, District 3 Roy Runyon, District 4 Mike Shepherd, District 5 Dianne Robinson, District 6 Carol Arends, District 7 Will Maupin, District 8 PLANNING COMMISSION Greg Wheeler, Chairman Jessica Kennedy, Vice-Chairman John W. Cockburn Lois E. Hoell Andy Kosusko Bill Mosiman Linda Streissguth, AICP MANETTE KEY COMMUNICATORS John Ales Jordy Andrew Richard Bruskrud Councilman Adam Brockus Jeff Hecker Ken Hills Holly James Ruth Reese Jane Rebelowski Commissioner Greg Wheeler Mauntrece Zamzow CITY OF BREMERTON Andrea L. Spencer, AICP, Director of Community Development Lindsey Sehmel, Planner I, Community Development ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ PART I: INTRODUCTION A. Site Location ................................................................................................5 B. Comprehensive Plan Context ......................................................................5 PART II: COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING A. A Citizen-Developed Plan ...........................................................................6 B. Plan visions, goals, and expectations .........................................................7 i. Community Character ......................................................................7 ii. Places for People .............................................................................8 iii. Vibrant Community Core ..................................................................8 C. Plan Consistency with Bremerton Comprehensive Plan ............................9 i. Community Character ......................................................................9 ii. Land Use ........................................................................................10 iii. Housing ..........................................................................................11 iv. Transportation ................................................................................12 v. Environment ...................................................................................13 vi. Economic Development .................................................................13 vii. City Services ..................................................................................14 D. Plan Land Use Map & Designations .........................................................16 PART III: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Manette Center Core (MCC) .....................................................................18 B. Manette Transitional Residential (MTR)....................................................22 C. Manette Low Density Residential (LDR) ...................................................25 D. Street Standards .......................................................................................26 ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ This Page Intentionally Left Blank ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. SITE LOCATION Manette is a Bremerton neighborhood east of the Port Washington Narrows. The Manette peninsula is characterized by single-family residential neighborhoods with a distinct small- scale commercial district that enjoy spectacular views to the Narrows, Sinclair Inlet, downtown Bremerton and other scenic points. The plan boundary area encompasses approximately 34 acres B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONTEXT Bremerton’s 2004 Comprehensive Plan established the “Centers Concept” for the future growth of the city, and designated an area of the Manette community as a “Neighborhood Center.” It is envisioned that this area will include mixed-use structures, pedestrian-oriented design, varied housing types, and neighborhood scale commercial, professional, and community services. The services that are provided in a center of this type are intended to serve the territory within approximately 1/2 mile radius surrounding the center. Neighborhood centers have an identi¿ able central (or “core”) area with building heights of two or three stories with retail or of¿ ce uses at ground level and residential above. The density of VICINITY MAP housing is lower as distance from the core area increases. Away from the core area, residential uses will predominate. Manette’s citizens worked cooperatively with the City in the development of this sub-area plan. The purpose of this plan is to establish the overall plan vision for the center, demonstrate the plan’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and establish the design and development standards for the center. This plan has been developed to show how the area can provide living environments attractive to a growing segment of society that desires a more active, stimulating setting, offering the ability to access key amenities and conveniences without driving. SUB-AREA PLAN BOUNDARY MAP ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. A CITIZEN DEVELOPED PLAN The Manette neighborhood has a well- and what the area’s growth expectations are. established group of community leaders During November & December 2008, the Key and actively engaged citizens. The process Communicators took these “meetings” out to for this plan’s development included utilizing the public and held informal information-sharing citizens for outreach communication efforts sessions within the plan area at local businesses, within their neighborhood and to develop dinner parties, and their own homes. The the plan principles and goals that shaped outcome of these community meetings helped the regulations that are contained within de¿ ne the goals, visions, and expectations of this document. This approach proved very the plan. successful, and without the considerable time and effort that this community put into PUBLIC MEETINGS public participation the development of this A series of open public meetings were held at the plan would have not been a success. Norm Dicks Government Center to gather input from the citizens regarding the sub-area plan. The plan was developed through the use The meetings are summarized as follows: of two very important public outreach tools: “Key Communicators,” and open •January 12, 2009 public meetings where participants worked General open house through many exercises that shaped the •January 26, 2009 plan elements. Needs assessment charrette KEY COMMUNICATORS•February 23, 2009 Geographic application charrette The City worked with a group of Manette residents who were willing to commit •March 16, 2009 additional time to the sub-area planning Development standards & streets charrette effort – this group was called the “Key •March 30, 2009 Communicators.” The purpose of this group Draft plan review was to work closely with staff to develop •April 21, 2009 materials to share important information Planning Commission with the public about the sub-area planning Hearing & Recommendation effort and to communicate the importance of public participation. The ideas behind •May 2009 to June 2009 the Key Communicators were that Manette Anticipated City Council adoption residents would likely be more willing to talk with their neighbors about neighborhood planning than they would be with city staff, and that the Key Communicators would serve as an excellent conduit for sharing information that wouldn’t otherwise exist without their participation. City staff developed a “Meeting in a Binder” for use by the Key Communicators. This “meeting” was created to help the Communicators share information about the Growth Management Act, the City’s Comprehensive Plan, how the sub area planning process works, details of existing conditions within the Manette neighborhood, ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. PLAN VISIONS, GOALS & EXPECTATIONS Community outreach efforts focused on information-sharing and collaborative steps towards de¿ ning the 20-year vision for Manette. Surveys, questionnaires and roundtable discussions were the primary methods used to gather information regarding the citizen’s goals and expectations for growth. In the development of this plan, the citizens developed a number of key principles to follow. The principles were categorized into three groups – “Community Character,” “Places for People,” and “Vibrant Community Core.” The following describes in detail the goals and policies that will guide growth within the Manette Neighborhood Center: i. COMMUNITY CHARACTER (CC) GUIDING PRINCIPLE AND OVERALL GOAL: Preservation of a unique and charming neighborhood where signi¿ cant consideration should be given to the scale, size, quality, and compatibility of future development. OBJECTIVES: CC1 : Encourage development to compliment the scale of the surrounding neighborhood. CC2 : Promote view preservation by limiting building heights to 3 stories (Maximum 35’ height). CC3 : Encourage high quality architecture through the use of: Large windows along any ground À oor commercial û facade facing the public sidewalk or sidewalks providing circulation within a site. Bulk reduction. Building modulation shall be û used to reduce the appearance of mass and bulk of the structure. Easily identi¿ able building entrances from the û street and sidewalks. CC4 : In-¿ ll development should provide a variety of housing options. Encourage Mixed-Use development within the û commercial core Encourage single family homes, cottage style û homes, single family attached, and accessory dwelling units (ADU’s) in the area surrounding the commercial district where appropriate. CC5 : Encourage the use of sustainable development practices such as green roofs, green buildings, and LEED certi¿ cation throughout the plan area. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. PLAN VISIONS, GOALS & EXPECTATIONS CONT.... ii. PLACES FOR PEOPLE (PFP) GUIDING PRINCIPLE AND OVERALL GOAL: Establish an eclectic and active community space that provides opportunities for social gatherings within a walkable environment. OBJECTIVES: PFP1 : Improve the public right of way to be pedestrian and bicycle friendly: Encourage the widening of sidewalks. û Encourage the development of bicycle û lanes. iii. VIBRANT COMMUNITY CORE (VCC) PFP2 : Encourage the creation of public spaces with redevelopment. GUIDING PRINCIPLE PFP3 : Promote undergrounding of utilities AND OVERALL GOAL: to enhance the pedestrian environment Promote a compact, walkable commercial and overall community aesthetics. core that will provide diverse services for the surrounding neighborhood in a sustainable PFP4 : Encourage the addition of public fashion. amenities such as, art, neighborhood identity signs, benches, planters, OBJECTIVES: streetlights, etc. to the public right of way.VCC1 : Allow an eclectic mix of uses in the commercial core that are appropriate for a neighborhood center. VCC2 : Promote redevelopment in the commercial core that is in scale with its surroundings by limiting building heights to 3 stories (Maximum 35’ height). VCC3 : Consider ways to make street improvements that support local businesses. Recon¿ gure on-street parking to make û user-friendly and increase supply. Encourage the placement of public û amenities in the right-of-way. VCC4 : Reduce the predominance of motor vehicles within the commercial core. Consider use of traf¿ c-calming measures. û Screen parking areas to improve visual û aesthetics. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The purpose of this section of the sub-area plan is to demonstrate that the principles, goals, and ultimately the zoning regulations presented in the plan are in compliance with and further the goals of the City’s overall Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is organized into chapters (formally referred to as “Elements”) and this section follows the same organization. Speci¿ c goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan have been reproduced in this document for reference with the information regarding how the speci¿ c sub-area plan goals meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan policies. i. COMMUNITY CHARACTER ELEMENT The Manette Sub-Area Plan addresses the needs and goals of the Community Character element of the comprehensive plan clearly through the following measures: The Manette community has addressed the desire for a unique and charming neighborhood û Sub-area Plan Goals: that keeps with the scale and compatibility of the current developments. CC1, CC3, CC4 A variety of housing types should be available within the community, striving to keep living û options open for a wide array of age groups and income levels. This is accomplished by allowing for cottage-style homes, attached single family homes, and additional dwelling units on single Sub-area Plan Goals: CC1, CC3, CC4 family lots. The orientation of buildings and structures should cater the pedestrian atmosphere to provide û a safer environment, enhancing the ‘eyes on the street’ and encouraging interaction within the Sub-area Plan Goals: VCC3, VCC4, PFP1, PFP4 community. The streetscape along 11 Street shall include attractive landscaping, neighborhood identity th û signs, wider sidewalks, lighting ¿ xtures, and a separation between the pedestrian pathway and Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP2, PFP4, VCC3, VCC4 traf¿ c lanes. Redevelopment efforts should focus on increasing open space, providing attractive pedestrian û Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP2, PFP4, environments, and adding to the sense of community. PFP5 City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Community Character Policies CC1B Ensure that new development is of a type, scale, orientation, and design that improves upon the neighborhood’s desired and de¿ ned character, aesthetics, and qualities. CC2 Assure that new development relates to surrounding uses and provides for urban livability. CC2B Ensure that in¿ ll construction and area redevelopment are done in a manner that reinforces the neighborhood’s desired and de¿ ned character and that architecturally compliments the surrounding commercial and residential areas. CC2C Encourage building and site design that allows a variety of housing forms and also is compatible with the character of the immediate surrounding area, thereby generating community support for new types of housing development. CC2E Buildings should demonstrate efforts to accommodate a human scale and urban livability. CC3 Provide for a safe, pleasant, and rich pedestrian experience. CC3A Encourage a sense of neighborliness and community by orienting one or more building entrances to commercial buildings towards the pedestrian sidewalks and pathways that lead to adjoining neighborhoods. CC3B Promote pedestrian-oriented environments in Centers through the creation of streetscapes and building designs that make walking an attractive and convenient transportation mode. CC3C Encourage attractive pedestrian-oriented development. CC4 Promote the development of areas of special character, encouraging a diversity of communities within the city. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... ii. LAND USE ELEMENT The Manette neighborhood is a well established historical neighborhood center. The sub- area plan addresses the need for future commercial and residential growth in a manner that does not disrupt the nature of the neighborhood. Through planning efforts residents expressed a desire for future commercial services to û include local eclectic shops such as a high quality grocery store, local retail, pharmacy/ drug store, post of¿ ce, and dry cleaning services, in addition to coffee houses, book Sub-area Plan Goals: VCC1, stores, community gathering spaces, and ‘third places’. VCC3, VCC4. There should be an increase in open and green space (such as parks), streetscape û improvements (benches, planters, wider sidewalks) and communal gathering spaces Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP2, PFP3, PFP4. throughout the neighborhood. The commercial core should work towards providing the daily services that the û surrounding community needs, further reducing the impact and requirement for motorized Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, transportation, and enhancing the pedestrian environment. PFP2, PFP4, VCC1, VCC3, VCC4. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Land Use Policies LU1F Identify and promote the architectural and scale characteristics of surrounding neighborhoods for the development of Centers serving a neighborhood or a community. LU1K Promote neighborhoods which foster interaction among residents, contribute to well-being of citizenry, and create and sustain a sense of community and personal safety. LU1L Strategically locate amenities such as parks, sidewalks, community centers, and gathering places to support residential areas. Provide for social interaction through street design elements. û Encourage residential designs with an orientation towards social interaction, as opposed û to the automobile. LU4 Provide for walkability throughout Centers and neighborhoods. LU4A Improve pedestrian access to commercial and community services within Centers and neighborhoods. LU4B Develop pedestrian connections between residential areas and neighborhood services. LU9E In general, the intensity of land uses should be varied, with more intense uses nearer the core of the Center and less intense at the edge. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... iii. HOUSING ELEMENT The housing element of the Manette sub-area plan addresses the future needs of the community and expected growth targets within the historically concentrated neighborhood. By allowing creative in¿ ll through cottage style homes, attached and detached single û family homes, townhomes, and ADU’s, the neighborhood will be able to address the needs of aging citizens, young families, and singles with a variety of reasonably priced Sub-area Plan Goals: CC4, VCC1 housing options. In addition to addressing the housing needs the community will increase the walkability û within the neighborhood, provide a safer pedestrian environment, and activate the Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP3, PFP4 streetscape. The allowed density in the MTR zone will accommodate the need for future growth û Sub-area Plan Goals: CC4 allocated to the Manette neighborhood. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Housing Policies H3 Provide a variety of housing types and densities to meet changing needs of Bremerton residents. H3C Stimulate the production of new housing for all incomes, ages, and family types. H4 Provide housing in mixed-use centers for a variety of incomes, age groups, and household types. H7 Promote safe, attractive, livable neighborhoods that will attract homeowners. H7D Improve the visual quality of residential areas where needed. Accent viewsheds in the design of residential areas. û Identify and establish view corridors along residential streets. û Advocate for the undergrounding of utilities. û H8 Promote social interaction as well as neighborhood identity and initiatives. H8C Encourage walk-ability within neighborhoods. H8D Use neighborhood plans to outline public and private projects for each neighborhood. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... iv. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The Manette neighborhood is within walking distance of the regional transit terminal in downtown Bremerton. With well established bus services, sidewalks, and high traf¿ c volumes, Manette residents addressed needs such as traf¿ c calming measures through the neighborhood streets and E 11th St., better connection to parks, and realignment of parking along the arterial streets. The Transportation Element addresses traf¿ c calming measures such as curb bulbs, û landscaping improvements, and mid-block crosswalks. These alterations will create a Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP4, safer pedestrian and motor vehicle environment. VCC3, VCC4 The sub-area plan encourages alternatives to the automobile by sustaining the development û Sub-area Plan Goals: CC4, VCC1, VCC2. of transit supportive densities. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Transportation Policies T2B ReÀ ect the urban nature of roadways within Bremerton by encouraging, where appropriate: Street trees and landscaping û Traf¿ c calming strategies and devices û On-street public parking û Street lighting û Accommodations for transit stops û Crosswalks and sidewalks û T2C Restore/create unique neighborhood aesthetics via formation of distinctive streetscapes and traf¿ c controlling devices. T3D Where possible, the City shall require the under-grounding of overhead utilities to reduce the need for removal and maintenance of roadside vegetation. T4 Protect residential neighborhoods from negative transportation impacts. T4A Minimize the impacts of traf¿ c on residential neighborhoods by discouraging the use of local access streets by non-local traf¿ c. T4C Reduce speed on neighborhood streets through the use of street design devices such as curb bulbs, “median obstacles,” or other measures proven to be safe and effective at reducing travel speeds. T12 Provide a transportation system that effectively serves the needs of and encourages pedestrian, bicycle and other non-motorized travel. T12B Ensure that designated Centers are walkable, and encourage connectivity. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... v. ENVIRONMENT ELEMENT The Manette Sub-Area Plan shall be sustainable in design and implementation. It is encouraged to enact sustainable development standards with concern of the û environment, increase the amount of public open space, and provide physical and visual Sub- access to the shorelines through access improvements within the plan boundary. area Plan Goals: CC5, PFP1, PFP2, PFP3. Sub-area Streetscapes will be inviting, accessible, and functional for the neighborhood. û Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP3, PFP4, VCC3, VCC4. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Environment Policies E8B Provide both physical and visual access to shorelines. E10B Encourage dense development around designated Centers, which incorporate open space. E11C Encourage streetscapes that are human-scale, enable walking, and bicycling, and are aesthetically pleasing. . E11D Create sidewalks and improved shoulders along right-of-ways to enable walking vi. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT The community developed the commercial components of the Manette Sub-Area Plan to align neatly with the comprehensive goals of the city. They focused on preserving the current commercial uses while incorporating new uses that would better serve the community. Future economic growth should support the function, charm and eclectic nature of the û Sub-area Plan Goals: CC1, CC3, VCC1, VCC2, VCC3. commercial core as it is today. Locating live/work and extensive mixed use developments within the MCC zone will û generate more supportive functions of commerce by increasing the serving population. Sub-area Plan Goals: CC4, VCC1, VCC2. Maintaining the consistency of the neighborhood by restricting development to 35’ in û Sub-area Plan Goals: CC2, VCC2. height. Sub-area Plan Goals: VCC3, VCC4. Parking must be accommodative and attractive. û City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Economic Development Policies EC1J Ensure business zoning designations are in appropriate locations. EC2 Maintain the existing asset of being a small city with convenience and quality. EC2C Encourage mixed use developments (residential combined with commercial activities) in designated Centers. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... vii. CITY SERVICES ELEMENT The Manette Sub-Area Plan is the product of a community-based planning effort. To create the plan the Key Communicators led the early information-sharing efforts, and the community- at-large actively participated in public meetings. Both helped shape the visions and goals of this plan. The sub-area plan for Manette calls for in¿ ll development that will keep with the scale, û nature, and charm of the neighborhood, further contributing the ef¿ ciency of services Sub-area Plan Goals: CC2, CC4, PFP 1, PFP 2, PFP 4. within the City of Bremerton. Pedestrian centralized improvements will increase the safety and movement of people. û Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP3, PFP4, VCC1, VCC3, VCC4. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ City Services Policies CS8 Provide meaningful opportunities for community involvement. CS15A Emphasize conformity of design within sub-areas of the City, especially neighborhoods. Improve sidewalks throughout the City, especially accessibility features. û CS17B Work with appropriate City departments to produce and implement development standards for neighborhood development. Stress safety, access, recreation, and pedestrian friendliness. û Address such topics as lighting, sidewalks, and street design in a manner that assures û consistency with this Comprehensive Plan. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ This Page Intentionally Left Blank ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. PLAN LAND USE MAP & DESIGNATIONS ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. PLAN LAND USE MAP & DESIGNATIONS MANETTE CENTER CORE (MCC) The Manette Center Core is centralized around the commercial areas of E 11th and is a total of 14 acres. The zone is constrained to the north mid-block between E 11th and 13th streets, to the south by 10th Street, to the east mid-block between Scott and Perry Streets, and to the West by Port Washington Narrows. MANETTE TRANSITIONAL RESIDENTIAL (MTR) The Manette Transitional Residential is centralized around the center core totaling 14 acres. The zone is constrained to the north by the Wheaton-Win¿ eld triangle, to the west by the Port Washington Narrows, and to the east by Pitt Avenue. MANETTE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) The Manette Low Density Residential is centralized north of the MCC and is a total of 6 acres. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. MANETTE CENTER CORE (MCC) INTENT & PURPOSE The intent of the Manette Center Core (MCC) zone is to implement the vision for this area established by the Manette Sub-Area Plan principles and goals. The development standards for the central core of this neighborhood center are to create a lively mixed-use and retail street frontage in a safe, walkable environment, and to encourage pedestrian-scale building design. These regulations to work in conjunction with the city’s zoning code and other development regulations contained within the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC). If provisions of this plan conÀ ict with provisions elsewhere in the BMC, the provisions of this plan will apply. When it is unclear which regulations apply, then the presumption will be that the regulations of this chapter take precedence, with the ultimate determination to be made by the Director. PERMITTED USESPROHIBITED USES The following uses are permitted:The following uses are prohibited: (a) Bed and breakfast;(a) Light and heavy industrial/manufacturing uses; (b) Co-location of wireless (b) Drive-through facility; telecommunications facilities per (c) Automobile sales, service, repair or car wash; BMC20.46.140; (d) Storage of equipment and materials; (c) Community facility; (e) Adult entertainment; (d) Drinking place; (f) Work release facility; (e) Entertainment use; (g) Commercial surface parking lot not serving a (f) Finance insurance and real estate; permitted use (g) General of¿ ce and business service; (h) Outdoor storage. Storage is allowed only within (h) General retail;a fully enclosed permanent structure. Garbage cans and dumpsters shall be placed in an enclosure (i) Hotel and lodging place containing ten as per BMC 20.46.120. No garbage enclosure or fewer guest rooms; shall be permitted between a street and the primary (j) Medical of¿ ce and clinic; pedestrian access of a building. (k) Museum and gallery; (l) Park, playground and open space; (m) Personal service; (n) Physical Fitness and Health Club; (o) Public administration; (p) Residential as a secondary use; (q) Restaurant; (r) Theater; (s) Veterinary clinic. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. MCC CONTINUED.... DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (3) Projects providing a through-block corridor that facilitates pedestrian access Maximum building height (a): Thirty-¿ ve (35) feet. in a location approved by the city: Five Front yard setback (b): No minimum front yard (5) percent bonus. setback. The maximum front yard setback shall (4) Projects providing at least ¿ fty be ten (10) feet. At least eighty (80) percent of the (50) percent of their required parking building’s front facade shall meet the maximum front underground or within the building: yard setback. Twenty (20) percent bonus. Side yard setback (c): Zero (0), except when (5) Projects providing green building adjacent to the low density residential zone (R-10) techniques and elements: Fifteen (15) where a ten (10) foot setback is required for the ¿ rst percent bonus story and a twenty (20) foot setback is required for additional stories. Maximum development coverage (g): Maximum coverage by impervious surfaces Rear yard setback (d): Zero (0), except when seventy-¿ ve (75) percent; provided, that adjacent to the low density residential zone (R-10) through the use of any combination of the where a ten (10) foot setback is required for the ¿ rst mechanisms listed in subsections (f)(1) story and a twenty (20) foot setback is required for through (5) of this section, up to ninety- additional stories ¿ ve (95) percent maximum development maximum density (e) There is no for residential as coverage may be allowed. a secondary use. Height Measurement: (h) The height of Maximum building coverage (f): Sixty (60) percent a building or structure shall be measured base maximum; provided, that through the use of as the distance from the average ¿ nal any combination of the following, building coverage grade to the highest point of the structure. may be increased up to eighty-¿ ve (85) percent Exceptions: penthouse for elevators, maximum by providing any of the following: ¿ rewalls, chimneys, and À agpoles may (1) Projects containing mixed-use (commercial exceed maximum height limits. None of and residential): Twenty (20) percent bonus. these exceptions to the height regulations shall be used for advertising of any kind. (2) Projects providing a pedestrian-oriented plaza or area of at least one hundred ¿ fty (150) square feet along a pedestrian walkway, at an intersection corner, bus stop, or other key pedestrian area approved by the city. Such areas shall contain seating for at least four (4) people, a trash receptacle and three (3) or more of the following: A pedestrian shelter, a drinking fountain, a bike rack, pedestrian-scale lights, pavers on the walkway surfaces, a kiosk, a street vendor station providing food or beverages, trees, a statue or sculpture, a public restroom, or other elements that the city agrees would create a sense of place. Interior courtyards with these amenities qualify if they would be readily apparent and accessible to pedestrians on adjoining sidewalks: Fifteen (15) percent bonus. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. MCC CONTINUED.... DESIGN STANDARDS The purpose of these design standards is to create a lively mixed-use and retail street presence in a safe, walkable environment, and to encourage pedestrian-scale building design. The following design standards shall be applied to all new development or signi¿ cant redevelopment. When development involves the remodel or expansion of existing structures, the Director may modify these requirements to reasonably ¿ t the scope and scale of the remodel or expansion. Building Size (1). Structures shall not weather protection for pedestrians with a marquee, exceed¿ fteen thousand (15,000) square awning, building projection or other permanent feet gross À oor area. structural element, over approximately eighty (80) percent of the frontage of the subject property. The Entrances (2). Building entrances shall weather protection must cover at least ¿ ve feet of be easily identi¿ able from the street and the width of the sidewalk and be located a minimum sidewalks. This may be accomplished of ten (10) feet above the sidewalk. The width may through the use of such features as: vary to accommodate street trees, streetlights, etc. Ornamentation and/or architectural detailing around the door, recessing or Public Amenities (7). At least one (1) of the following protruding the entrance area at least three amenities shall be required along any ground À oor (3) feet, or including a canopy, portico or facade facing the public sidewalk: Outdoor eating overhang extending at least ¿ ve (5) feet areas; street furniture such as benches, bike racks over the sidewalk in the entrance area. and trash receptacles; plantings in window boxes; public art; or public display cases, or information Windows (3). Any ground À oor facade kiosks. facing the public sidewalk(s) shall include window(s) that allow views into interior Corner Treatments (8). Structures at the building spaces. At least seventy-¿ ve (75) intersection of two (2) streets shall include a percent of all such facades, measured signi¿ cant architectural feature at the building to ten (10) feet above the sidewalk or corner that provides visual emphasis at the corner. surface grade, shall be comprised of such This may be accomplished through the inclusion of windows. a major entryway at the corner, a building element the height of which varies from the remainder of the Bulk (4). Building modulation shall be used building by at least ten (10) percent, or a plaza at the to reduce the appearance of mass and bulk corner that includes a fountain, artwork, or planting of the structure. This may be accomplished of at least ten (10) feet in height. through the additional setback of upper À oors by at least ten (10) feet, recessed or protruding doorways, use of upper À oor balconies, or varied use of materials. Blank Facades (5). Building facades shall not present a blank facade to view from public rights-of-way, common parking areas, or residential properties. Such facades may be broken by windows, trellises, columns, variations in plane, or other devices that add variation and interest to the facade. Pedestrian Environment (6). All buildings fronting on streets shall provide overhead ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. MCC CONTINUED.... OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS (a) Parking shall meet the standards of Chapter 20.48 BMC and (b) Parking site design shall meet the following: (1) Access to parking shall be provided from an alley if available; and (2) At least eighty percent (80%) of parking spaces shall be located to the rear of a building away from the primary pedestrian access. LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS Shall meet the standards of BMC Chapter 20.50.050(C) Centers landscaping. SIGN STANDARDS Signs shall meet the standards of Chapter 20.52 BMC. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. MANETTE TRANSITIONAL RESIDENTIAL (MTR) INTENT & PURPOSE The intent of the Manette Transitional Residential (MTR) zone is to implement the vision for this area established by the Manette Sub-Area Plan principles and goals. The area designated as MTR is expected to accommodate new growth that will support the neighborhood center. It is the intent of these regulations to work in conjunction with the city’s zoning code and other development regulations contained within the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC). If provisions of this plan conÀ ict with provisions elsewhere in the BMC, the provisions of this plan will apply. When it is unclear which regulations apply, then the presumption will be that the regulations of this chapter take precedence, with the ultimate determination to be made by the Director. PERMITTED USESACCESSORY USES The following uses are permitted:The following accessory uses may be permitted when found in connection with a principal use: (a) Bed and breakfast; (a) Attached or detached accessory dwelling unit (b) Co-location of wireless per BMC 20.46.010; telecommunications facilities per BMC 20.46.140;(b) Detached garage, carport, and parking facilities associated with the primary use of the property; (c) Day care facilities (c) Home occupation per BMC 20.46.030; (d) Education, schools (K-12), and day care facilities of twelve (12) or fewer (d) Playhouses, patios, cabanas, porches, gazebos, students;swimming pools and incidental permanently constructed household storage buildings; (e) “Live-work units” with upstairs living and downstairs work unit;(e) Other necessary and customary uses determined by the Director to be appropriate, incidental and (f) Parks, playgrounds and open space; subordinate. (g) Residential uses of the following type: (1) Group residential facility – Class I (2) Nursing convalescent home (3) Senior housing complex (4) Single unit structure, attached or detached (5) Townhouses (6) Zero lot line development; (h) Worship and religious facilities of ¿ fteen thousand (15,000) square feet grossÀ oor area or less ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. MTR CONTINUED.... DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum building height (a): Thirty-¿ ve (35) feet. Height Measurement: (h) The height of a Front yard setback (b): Minimum front yard setback building or structure shall be measured as shall be ten (10) feet. the distance from the average ¿ nal grade to the highest point of the structure. Exceptions: Side yard setback (c): Minimum side yard setback penthouse for elevators, ¿ rewalls, chimneys, shall be ¿ ve (5) feet. andÀ agpoles may exceed maximum height Rear yard setback (d): Minimum rear yard setback limits. None of these exceptions to the height shall be ten (10) feet. regulations shall be used for advertising of Maximum development coverage: (e) Seventy- any kind. ¿ ve (75) percent. Accessory Structures (f). The following standards shall apply to all accessory structures, such as but not limited to gazebos, cabanas, garages, carports, and shops, excluding accessory dwelling units per BMC 20.46.010: (1) The maximum area for all accessory structures shall be eighty (80) percent of the principal use ALLOWABLE DENSITY not to exceed one thousand two hundred (1,200) Minimum Density (a). The minimum square feet. required density is ¿ ve (5) dwellings per (2) Setbacks of detached accessory structures acre. are pursuant to BMC 20.44.060. Maximum Density. (b) The maximum ) Design Requirements for Detached Garages, (g allowed density is ¿ fteen (15) dwellings per Storage Buildings and Shops: acre. (1) Structures shall be designed so that the appearance of the building remains that of the OFF-STREET PARKING principal unit’s character including the following: REQUIREMENTS (i) Constructed of similar materials as the Off-street parking shall be provided in principal unit; accordance with the requirements set forth (ii) A roof of equal or greater pitch as the in Chapter 20.48 BMC. principal unit; LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS (iii) A height no more than twenty-¿ ve (25) percent greater than the principal unit not to Shall meet the standards of BMC Chapter exceed thirty-¿ ve (35) feet. 20.50.050(C) Centers landscaping. (2) Vehicle Entrance Setbacks: When the vehicle entrance faces the street, the structure shall have a front yard setback of at least ¿ fteen (15) feet, except as provided in BMC 20.44.020 (Traditional Front Yard Setbacks). ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. MTR CONTINUED.... SIGN STANDARDS Signs shall meet the standards of Chapter 20.52 BMC and the following: Freestanding Signs (a) Sign Area (1). The maximum area of freestanding sign shall be limited to ¿ fty (50) square feet. Number of Signs (2). Only one (1) freestanding sign is allowed per each street frontage. Height (3). The height of a freestanding sign shall not exceed six feet. Building Signs (b) Sign Area (1). Signs attached to a building may have an aggregated area that shall not exceed one (1) square foot for each one (1) lineal foot of building façade width. Maximum Sign Size (2). The aggregate area of all building signs, projecting signs, and other signs attached to buildings shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet. Number of Signs (3). The number of signs is limited to one (1) sign per street frontage per business. Illumination (c). (1) When sign is located adjacent to the low density residential zone, the sign shall not be illuminated between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (2) Signs may be illuminated directly, indirectly, or internally, providing the lighting is directed away from other land uses, and away from on-coming traf¿ c. (3) Moving, À ashing, or animated signs are prohibited. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. MANETTE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-10) INTENT & PURPOSE Inclusion of an area designated Low Density Residential (R-10) within the Manette sub-area plan was considered an important aspect of the plan. The R-10 area is closely related to the core yet contains a cohesive neighborhood that the community felt was not appropriate for additional density or commercial development. The area was included in the plan boundary for the purpose of analyzing traf¿ c À ow and consideration of overall street improvements only. Therefore it is not anticipated that this plan will regulate this residential area any differently than the City’s currently adopted zoning regulations DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS All development regulations are pursuant to BMC Chapter 20.60, Low Density Residential (R-10) ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ROADWAY EXPECTATIONS The street standards section of the sub-area plan describes the community expectations within the streetscapes of Manette. The map on the left facing page depicts the commu- nity’s vision for the improvements needed to make this neighborhood center more pedestrian friendly. Details of each street designation are contained within the following pages. EXISTING CONDITIONS Manette currently experiences a high volume tran- siting the bridge through East 11th Street. Residents have expressed the desire for right-of-way improve- ments that will calm the traf¿ c and ease pedestrian movement throughout the neighborhood. Current right-of-way widths within the commercial core vary from 54 feet to 60 feet. These widths are consistent for a neighborhood center and are suf¿ - cient for the improvements envisioned for the plan. Right-of-way widths for the neighborhood streets average 40 feet. The center’s current amenities include 5-foot side- walks and parallel parking throughout the neighbor- hood. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ COMMUNITY BOULEVARD DESIRED AMENITIES INTENT & PURPOSE As the primary circulation streets within Manette, These streets serve the core commercial the Community Boulevard should include many area and are intended to be the pedestrian amenities to make it a desirable streetscape, such primary streets, yet they are also the as: primary streets that move vehicles through Decorative pedestrian-scale streetlights placed the area. The streets should be designed û at 25’ intervals. in a manner encouraging safe pedestrian Street trees planted within the sidewalk area, movement, ease of vehicular use, and also û while maintaining ADA accessibility. serve the local businesses with additional Hanging baskets. parking. û Pavers or decorative paving. û Planters. û Street furnishings. DESIGN STANDARD û Information kiosks & way¿ nding signage. The existing right-of-way width for these û Public art. streets is 60 feet. Improvements should be û Utilization of sidewalks by local businesses for made to re-con¿ gure on-street parking from û uses such as outdoor dining. parallel to angled spaces and the sidewalk Use of low impact development (LID) width should be increased to at least 10 û techniques such as pervious pavement. feet. SEE FIGURE 1 D. STREET STANDARDS ~ MULTIMODAL STREETS INTENT & PURPOSEDESIRED AMENITIES These streets serve Manette’s core The multimodal streets serve the businesses within commercial area and they are intended to Manette and are utilized by pedestrians, non- be pedestrian friendly, they are narrower motorized users, and automobiles. They should than the “Community Boulevard” and serve include many amenities to make it a desirable a lower traf¿ c volume. streetscape, such as: Decorative pedestrian-scale streetlights placed û DESIGN STANDARD at 25’ intervals. The existing right-of-way width for these Street trees planted at the back of sidewalk if û streets is 54 feet. The desired sidewalk ample width is not available to accommodate width is at least 5 feet. Some of these streets ADA accessibility. have the opportunity to be utilized as part of Hanging baskets. û the “Non-Motorized-Transportation” network Pavers or decorative paving. û and therefore “sharrows” (which are “shared Planters. û right-of-ways” between bikes and cars) Street furnishings. û should be encouraged where appropriate. Sharrows (bike lanes). û Use of low impact development (LID) û techniques such as pervious pavement. SEE FIGURES 2-5 ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS INTENT & PURPOSEDESIRED AMENITIES Neighborhood streets serve the residential areas As these streets serve the residential areas surrounding the commercial core of Manette. These of Manette, improvements should not give are low-speed streets not intended to serve large the impression of a major commercial area. volumes of traf¿ c. The design goal for these streets Encouraged are improvements such as: is to allow pedestrians to feel comfortable walking Street trees planted at the back of û and using the streetscape.sidewalk. Use of low impact development û DESIGN STANDARD (LID) techniques such as pervious The existing right-of-way width for these streets is pavement. 40 feet. The desired sidewalk width is at least 5 SEE FIGURE 6 feet. D. STREET STANDARDS ~ TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES Some areas of Manette may require the use of traf¿ c calming features. The intent of this section is to identify the measures that are supported by the neighborhood. Traf¿ c calming measures should be utilized where Neighborhood Streets connect with Multimodal Streets and the Community Boulevard. Corner bulb-out; either a partial or full extension of the line of the curb into the vehicular right of way or parking lane. The bulb-out can be placed on one side or both sides of the intersection. This feature is primarily used to reduce the width of street at pedestrian crossings and to improve the visibility between pedestrians and drivers. Bulb-outs should be implemented generously on pedestrian primary streets such as E 11th Street, and Harkins. Traf¿ c calming landscape islands in the middle of neighborhood intersections to reduce traf¿ c speeds. A mid-block A crossing combined with a bulb-out can reduce jaywalking activities and pedestrian contact with traf¿ c by w having a narrowed street width at the crossing. They also slow oncoming traf¿ c through the crosswalk, increasing pedestrian and driver visibility. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 1 COMMUNITY BOULEVARD ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 2 MULTIMODAL STREETS NOTE: OPTION A - ANGLE PARKING, NO SHARROW ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 3 MULTIMODAL STREETS NOTE: OPTION B - PARALLEL PARKING WITH SHARROW ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 4 MULTIMODAL STREETS NOTE: OPTION C - ONE-WAY, SHARROW, ANGLE PARKING ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 5 MULTIMODAL STREETS NOTE: OPTION D - PARALLEL PARKING & VARIED SIDEWALK WIDTH ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 6 NEIGHBORHOOD STS NOTE: IF ADDITIONAL ROW IS AVAILABLE, PREFER PARKING BOTH SIDES ìÊÍØÇÙ×ØúÃùÓÈÃÍÖúÊ×Ï×ÊÈÍÎø×ÌÛÊÈÏ×ÎÈÍÖùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈ éÓÄÈÔéÈÊ××ÈéÇÓÈ× úÊ×Ï×ÊÈÍÎåÛÉÔÓÎÕÈÍÎ ¾ Attachment III ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, amending the Comprehensive Plan by adding the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan, and amending the Zoning Code Section 20.80 to activate the development standards for building heights, density, setbacks, and road standards as detailed in this ordinance. WHEREAS, the Washington State Growth Management Act authorizes the preparation of sub area plans and allows amendments to local Comprehensive Plans to incorporate sub area plans not limited in number during a year, and not limited to the annual Comprehensive Plan amendment cycle; and WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton has adopted a comprehensive plan under the provisions of Chapter 36.70A RCW that includes policies for the creation of sub area plans, and specifically for the area known as the Manette Neighborhood Center; and WHEREAS, at the time of the 2005 zoning code update the City of Bremerton zoned the Manette Neighborhood Center with a combination of zoning districts, and included a dotted outline on the City zoning map indicating the express intention of revisiting development standards for the area in conjunction with the preparation of a Sub Area Plan; and WHEREAS, in the 2008 budget the Bremerton City Council authorized funding for the preparation of a Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Development developed an outreach tool for the community in the form of ‘The Manette Key Communicators Meeting in a Binder’, this tool was widely utilized to educate and inform the public about the development of a Sub Area Plan; and WHEREAS, the Department of Community Development widely advertised and sponsored four public open houses on the Plan on January 12, 2009, February 23, 2009, March 16, 2009 and March 30, 2009 and solicited citizen input by conducting key communicator meetings with a range of neighborhood groups; and WHEREAS, the 2004 Bremerton Comprehensive Plan vision statement calls for Bremerton to be the metropolitan center of the West Sound, and includes numerous goals and policies for distinctive growth, enticing new development, and vibrant centers, and the Sub Area Plan is fully consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, on April 3, 2009 the City of Bremerton issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) finding the environmental impacts of the Sub Area Plan and associated development standards to not have significant adverse impacts with an administrative appeal deadline of April 18, 2009 and no appeals were filed; and 1 Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan Attachment III WHEREAS, on March 30, 2009 the first draft of the Plan have been made available to the general public and interested parties for review and comment at City offices and on the City’s web page; and WHEREAS, the draft Plan was received by the State of Washington Office of Community Trade and Economic Development on March 31, 2009 and no adverse comments were received; and WHEREAS, on April 21, 2009 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Sub Area Plan and concluded deliberations and made a recommendation for the City Council’s consideration; and WHEREAS, on June 3, 2009 the City Council conducted a public hearing so that the public had a further opportunity to comment on the Sub Area Plan and development regulations; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council accepts and adopts the Findings and Conclusions Exhibit A of the Planning Commission dated April 21, 2009 as presented in , attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full herein. SECTION 2. The Comprehensive Plan is amended by the addition of the Exhibit B Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan as presented in , attached hereto and incorporated by this reference as if set forth in full herein. SECTION 3. The adoption of the Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan consequently amends Page 49 of the 2004 Bremerton Comprehensive Plan, removing the map Exhibit C. and making changes to the text as depicted in SECTION 4. Section 20.80 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled “Sub- Area Plans” is amended as presented below. 20.80.080 SUBAREA PLANS. The following are subarea planning areas where subarea plans and unique development regulations may be created for each: (a) Bay Vista Subarea Plan (adopted by Ordinance No. 5077); (b) East Park Subarea Plan (adopted by Ordinance No. 4962); (c) Wheaton-Riddell Subarea Plan (adopted by Ordinance No. 5025); (d) Downtown Regional Center Subarea Plan (adopted by Ordinance No. 5034); (e)Austin Drive Subarea Plan Manette Subarea Plan (adopted by Ordinance No. ####); (f) Harrison Employment Center; 2 Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan Attachment III (g) Northwest Corporate Campus Employment Center; (h) Port Blakely Employment Center. The sub-area planning areas listed above having adopted sub-area plans are identified with the corresponding adopting ordinance number. This ordinance will contain the unique regulations and standards that guide development for that sub-area planning area. Subsequent amendment to adopted sub-area plans need not be identified in this section by the amending ordinance number. SECTION 5. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remainder of this ordinance. Provided however, that if any provision of this ordinance is held invalid or unconstitutional, then the provision in effect prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be in full force and effect for that individual provision as if this ordinance had never been adopted. SECTION 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council the___________ day of ____________________, 2009 _________________________________ Cecil McConnell, Council President Approved this ________ day of ________________________, 2009 _________________________________ CARY BOZEMAN, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________ ________________________________ CAROL ETGEN, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the________ day of ______________________, 2009 EFFECTIVE the_________day of ______________________, 2009 ORDINANCE NO. ____________ 3 Manette Neighborhood Center Sub Area Plan Û¨¸·¾·¬ Ý ÌØ×Í ÐßÙÛ ÌÑ ÞÛ ÎÛÓÑÊÛÜ ÌØ×Í ÐßÙÛ ÌÑ ÞÛ ÎÛÓÑÊÛÜ ÌØ×Í ÐßÙÛ ÌÑ ÞÛ ÎÛÓÑÊÛÜ ÌØ×Í ÐßÙÛ ÌÑ ÞÛ ÎÛÓÑÊÛÜ ÌØ×Í ÐßÙÛ ÌÑ ÞÛ ÎÛÓÑÊÛÜ ÌØ×Í ÐßÙÛ ÌÑ ÞÛ ÎÛÓÑÊÛÜ ÌØ×Í ÐßÙÛ ÌÑ ÞÛ ÎÛÓÑÊÛÜ ÌØ×Í ÐßÙÛ ÌÑ ÞÛ ÎÛÓÑÊÛÜ 49 Û¨¸·¾·¬ Ý Manette Neighborhood Center Essential neighborhood services such as small grocery and professional offices will also be accommodated. This area will become a destination for people from the entire community as it develops a unique character. Immediately outside of the commercial core area, this center will encourage an increase in residential density by strategically placing small apartment The Manette Neighborhood Center structures, cottage style homes, serves the well-defined Manette and townhomes in a way that neighborhood east of the Port protects the views of others while Washington Narrows. The Manette preserving their own views. peninsula is characterized by dense single family residential For more specific information neighborhoods that enjoy regarding the Manette spectacular views to the Narrows, Neighborhood Center please see Sinclair Inlet, downtown Bremerton the City’s ‘Manette Neighborhood and other points. Center Sub-Area Plan’ adopted by Ordinance # ______. The scale and design characteristics found within the Sub-Area plan respect both of these characteristics. Perhaps more than any other center in Bremerton, this center will have the feel and look of a traditional small-town downtown. In the Center Core, along 11th Street and vicinity, residential uses above traditional sidewalk-facing storefronts will be encouraged. Heights at the core will not exceed three stories with a 35’ height maximum. The core area will provide an attractive environment for small shops, restaurants, and specialty businesses. Comprehensive Plan City of Bremerton LU-11 Land Use Element Ý±³³»²¬ ýï From: Angela Kissler-Strauss To: Lindsey Sehmel; CC: Subject: the Manette re-zone Date: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 7:18:55 PM Attachments: Lindsey, we wanted to let you and the city know that we love what has been done with the Manette Sub-Area Plan. You had a tremendously dificult task of coalescing 2000 highly polarized opinions into some type of compromising plan. We believe you have achieved a balanced and fair solution with an unexpected level of success. One side of crazy people wanted a ridiculous and unworkable 25' height limit (see Manchester in PO for all the problems and litigation a 25' height limit can cause), and the other side of crazy people that wanted to destroy one of the most livable and pleasant single family neighborhoods in all of the Puget Sound Region by turning it into condo-town. Your proposed plan seems to fit the needs of the Manette neighborhood remarkable well, allowing for a significant increase in density while preserving the uniquely positive and longstanding character of the Manette neighborhood, and simultaneously dealing with some ongoing concerns such as traffic calming, view preservation, and parking. We believe it's bad form to complain when someone gets a 99 out of 100, so if your not interested in constructive criticism please stop reading now. However, if you are interested in finding out what improvements could be made we have two suggestions. First, allow a single land owner to build to 45' in the MCC, awarding this privilage to the first landowner to get an approved building plan from the communty development dept. We believe this would create an immediate and lucrative incentive for re-development of Manette. Also, it would encourage landowners to investigate the feasibilty of investing in the Manette neighborhood, which we feel could only be positive. Even if a landowner lost the race to plan acceptance, we feel the investigation of potential for development in the area would encourage 2nd, 3rd and 4th placers to build anyway (at 35' max). Second, we feel the R10 zoning of the LDR area could be R15, but we do not own Ý±³³»²¬ ýï property in this area, and when speaking to people who do (with one obvious exception) they all seem to like their neighborhood just the way it is. Thank you all for your dedication and perseverence in developing the Manette Sub-Area Plan. Your efforts will be appreciated for years (decades?, centuries?) to come. You, and the rest of the cities' staff have shown a remarkable ability to keep a level head in a sea of chaos. Thanks again, John Strauss & Angie Kissler 2317 E 17th St 98310 206-697-2021 (J's cel) Ý±³³»²¬ ýî From: Ryan Malane To: Lindsey Sehmel; CC: Subject: Comments for Manette Sub-Area Date: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 3:42:59 PM Attachments: Hi Lindsey, A quick FYI - your email address is misspelled as "Shemel" instead of "Sehmel" in the hyperlink from the pink box on your web site. Sending to that address results in a returned email. Who knows how many comments might have been missed? As to the plan, overall I think there are some great aspects to it. I would have liked to see more residents from the affected area involved in the actual discussions. I think many residents are still unaware of how this will impact their community. My comments are below: - 15000 Square feet is too large a footprint. Manette does not need any more of that sized building, and 15000 is completely opposite from the scale that residents have requested from this plan. Most buildings in the current commercial core are less than half that size. - The language in the proposal reads that the MTR zone borders Scott to the East, yet the map does not reflect this. This needs clarification. - Mid-block transitions between MCC and LDR (R-10) should be limited. It doesn’t make sense to split the block between Pitt and Scott from 11th to 13th between MCC and LDR. This offers no meaningful buffer from commercial to low-density residential and puts the remaining single family residences too close to potential commercial uses. A 10- ft setback is not adequate. All other splits are either 1) at existing commercial sites around existing residential; 2) at a street; or 3) between MCC and MTR zoning. - Where street widths allow, angled parking in front of businesses should be encouraged to promote the feel of a shopping/restaurant destination as well as increased parking. Ý±³³»²¬ ýí From: Jane Rebelowski To: Lindsey Sehmel; CC: janerebelowski@earthlink.net; Subject: Manette Sub Area Plan Date: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 4:04:50 PM Attachments: The description of boundaries of and map of boundaries is inconsistent. In addition Scott and Perry are Aves, not Streets Your plan is inconsistent with participants desires to maintain existing businesses and help them thrive. Your plan effectively destroys JBL Habitability, Superior Glass, Motorcycle Repair shop, and removes parking lot for Boatshed. These are the longest serving businesses in Manette. You have prohibited their use in the MCC yet almost all participants except the architects and planners strongly supported maintaining existing businesses as a top priority. It appears that the main focus is multi-family. I am very concerned that full on site parking is not required. By including areas within the MCC that do not front arterials you are opening up this entire area for severe traffic calming needs. Your plans are incorrect as to the r/w widths of several neighborhood streets that you intend to dump multi-family and commercial traffic on. "Traffic calming landscape islands" do not reduce speeds as your verbiage implies unless installed in a series. Their primary function is to reduce severity of collisions at intersections. Midblock crossings combined with bulb-outs would reduce available on street parking. The blocks length in the commercial area is quite short as it is. If you are really trying to encourage commercial activity this would hurt business parking. This would only be appropriate If you are trying to create Poulsbo Place or another phase of East Park. I Ý±³³»²¬ ýì èß°®·´îððç ÎÛæÜ®¿º¬Ó¿²»¬¬»Í«¾ß®»¿Ð´¿² Ü»¿®Ð´¿²²·²¹Ý±³³··±²ô Ú·®¬×©±«´¼´·µ»¬±¬¸¿²µ¬¸»Þ®»³»®¬±²°´¿²²·²¹¬¿ººô»°»½·¿´´§Ô·²¼»§Í»¸³»´¿²¼ß²¼®»¿Í°»²½»®ô º±®°«®«·²¹¬¸»Ó¿²»¬¬»Í«¾ß®»¿Ð´¿²òÌ¸»½¸¿´´»²¹»°®»»²¬»¼¾§¬¸»Ó¿²»¬¬»Ò»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼ Ý±¿´·¬·±²¿²¼ª±½¿´®»·¼»²¬©¿¼¿«²¬·²¹òÌ¸»·®¿¾·´·¬§¬±µ»»°¬¸»°®±½»³±ª·²¹º±®©¿®¼¿²¼¬¸»·® «²¼»®¬¿²¼·²¹©¿·²ª¿´«¿¾´»¬±¬¸»«½½»±º¬¸·°®±½»òË²º±®¬«²¿¬»´§¬¸»°´¿²·²±¬½±³°´»¬»ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´°®±ª··±²¿®»²»»¼»¼¬±®»¿´·¦»¿°´¿²¬¸¿¬©·´´³»»¬¬¸»²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼ª··±²¿²¼ ½±³°®»¸»²·ª»°´¿²½±²½»°¬òÚ±®¬«²¿¬»´§¬¸»§¸¿ª»¾»»²¿¾´»¬±µ»»°¿´´¬±¹»¬¸»®¿²¼»¬¬¸»¬¿¹» º±®¬¸»²»¨¬¬»°ò Ì¸»Í«¾ß®»¿Ð´¿²°®±½»·¿²±°°±®¬«²·¬§¬±·²½±®°±®¿¬»«²·¯«»±´«¬·±²¬±½±³³±²¦±²·²¹·«»ò Ì¸»Ó¿²»¬¬»°´¿²¬¿®¬¬¸·°®±½»ô§»¬¼±»²±¬®»¿´·¦»¬¸»·«»±º¬¸»®»·¼»²¬±®¬¸» ½±³°®»¸»²·ª»°´¿²òÌ¸»½«®®»²¬°´¿²©·´´´·µ»´§²±¬·²½®»¿»°±°«´¿¬·±²ô³¿·²¬¿·²¬¸»½«®®»²¬»½´»½¬·½ ³·¨±º±½½«°¿²½·»¿²¼¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®»±®°®±¬»½¬ª·»©òÇ»¬¿´´·¿¬¬¿·²¿¾´»·²¿²»²ª·®±²³»²¬¿´´§ «¬¿·²¿¾´»¼»·¹²ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´´§¬¸»°´¿²¼±»²±¬¿¼¼®»¬¸»²»©¾®·¼¹»½±²²»½¬·±²òÌ¸··°¿®¿³±«²¬·²¬¸»¼·¬®·¾«¬·±² ±º¬®¿ºº·½¬¸®±«¹¸Ó¿²»¬¬»òÌ¸»®»¿®»»ª»®¿´ª·¿¾´»±´«¬·±²òÌ¸·²»»¼¬±¾»·²½±®°±®¿¬»¼·²¬±¬¸» °´¿²ò×²¬»®²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼½±²²»½¬·±²¬¸®±«¹¸Ó¿²»¬¬»¿®»·³°±®¬¿²¬òß©»´´¿¬®¿ºº·½½¿´³·²¹ ³»¿«®»ô±³»±º©¸·½¸¿®»·²½±®°±®¿¬»¼·²¬¸»½«®®»²¬°´¿²ò É¸»²×´±±µ¿¬¬¸»°´¿²ô¬¸»º·®¬¬¸·²¹×²±¬·½»·¬¸»´¿½µ±º½±³³«²·¬§±°»²°¿½»òß½»²¬»®¸±«´¼ ¸¿ª»¿¹¿¬¸»®·²¹¿®»¿òÌ¸»®»¿®»±°°±®¬«²·¬·»º±®°«¾´·½¿©»´´¿°®·ª¿¬»±°»²°¿½»¬¸¿¬²»»¼¬±¾» ·²½±®°±®¿¬»¼ô§»¬×»»²±°®±ª··±²º±®¬¸·òßº¬»®¿´´ô©¸»®»©·´´Ó¿²»¬¬»Ú»¬¿²¼±¬¸»®¿½¬·ª·¬·» ±½½«®áÉ·¬¸±«¬·²¬»®º»®·²¹©·¬¸¿®¬»®·¿´¬®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²ò×¬·°±·¾´»ô©»½¿²³¿µ»·¬¾»¬¬»®ò ×¿³¿´±½±²½»®²»¼¿¾±«¬¬¸»¦±²·²¹¼»·¹²¿¬·±²¿²¼®»¹«´¿¬·±²º±®¬¸»¿®»¿ò×²¿¼¼·¬·±²¬±³··²¹ ¬®¿²·¬·±²¿²¼³«´¬·º¿³·´§¦±²»ô¬¸»®»¿®»±³»·«»©·¬¸¬¸»°®±°±»¼®»¹«´¿¬·±²¬¸¿¬©±«´¼ ®»²¼»®»ª»®¿´¾«·²»¿²¼¾«·´¼·²¹²±²½±²º±®³·²¹òÓ§«²¼»®¬¿²¼·²¹·¬¸»½«®®»²¬¼»ª»´±°³»²¬· ¿½½»°¬¿¾´»¿²¼¼»·®¿¾´»ô§»¬¬¸»°®±°±»¼½±¼»©±«´¼®»²¼»®»ª»®¿´¾«·´¼·²¹²±²½±²º±®³·²¹¿©»´´ ¿±³»±½½«°¿²½·»ø¿´¾»·¬¹®¿²¼º¿¬¸»®»¼÷ò ×¬©±«´¼¿´±¾»ª»®§¼·ºº·½«´¬¬±¼»ª»´±°³¿´´°¿®½»´ô©¸·½¸·¼»·®¿¾´»ò×¬©±«´¼¾»ª·®¬«¿´´§ ¬¸ ·³°±·¾´»¬±¿¼¼¿»½±²¼¬±®§¬±äÅ«¾ô±®¿²§±¬¸»®¾«·´¼·²¹¿´±²¹ïïòË²´»±²»±©²»¼¬¸» »²¬·®»¾´±½µô¼»³±´·¸·¬ô¿²¼»®»½¬»¼¿²»©¾«·´¼·²¹ø÷ò×¬¸¿¬Ó¿²»¬¬»á Ý±³³»²¬ ýì Ê·»©°®±¬»½¬·±²··³°±®¬¿²¬¬±¬¸»¿¼¶±·²·²¹²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼®»·¼»²¬ô»°»½·¿´´§¬¸±»±²Í½±¬¬ßª»²«»ò Ç»¬³¿µ·²¹»ª»®§¬¸·²¹¬¸»¿³»¸»·¹¸¬¼±»²±¬¸·²¹¬±°®±¬»½¬±®»²¸¿²½»ª·»©òÌ¸»Í«¾ß®»¿Ð´¿² °®±½»¸±«´¼´±±µ¿¬°±¬»²¬·¿´ª·»©ô«»ô¿²¼¾«·´¼·²¹³¿¿²¼¿¼¶«¬®»¯«·®»³»²¬¿½½±®¼·²¹´§ò Ó«´¬·°´»¸»·¹¸¬¿²¼³¿½¿²¾»®»´»¹¿¬»¼¬±³¿·²¬¿·²ª·»©©¸·´»¿´´±©·²¹»²¸¿²½»³»²¬±º¬¸»½±®» ¼·¬®·½¬òÌ¸··²±¬½«®®»²¬´§·²½±®°±®¿¬»¼·²¬¸»°®±°±»¼Í«¾ß®»¿Ð´¿²òË²º±®¬«²¿¬»´§¬¸··¬¸» ®»«´¬±ºÒ×ÓÞÇ¿¬¬·¬«¼»¿²¼¬¿½¬·½òÉ»½¿²¼±¾»¬¬»®ò É»¸¿ª»¬¸»±°°±®¬«²·¬§¬±¼»ª»´±°¿°´¿²¬¸¿¬½¿²°®±ª·¼»º±®½±²¬·²«»¼¼»ª»´±°³»²¬¿²¼ °®»»®ª¿¬·±²±º¬¸»²»·¹¸¾±®¸±±¼½»²¬»®òÑ°»²°¿½»ô½·®½«´¿¬·±²ô°¿®µ·²¹ô¿®½¸·¬»½¬«®¿´½¸¿®¿½¬»®ôª·»© °®±¬»½¬·±²ô¿²¼«¬¿·²¿¾·´·¬§¿®»½«®®»²¬´§´¿½µ·²¹°®±°»®¼·®»½¬·±²¿²¼®»ª·»©°®±½»»òß¼¼·¬·±²¿´´§ô °®±ª··±²º±®»¨·¬·²¹«»ô¬®¿²·¬·±²±º«»¿²¼·²½®»¿»¼°±°«´¿¬·±²ô¿©»´´¿ª¿®·»¬§±º¸±«·²¹ ½¸±·½»ô·´¿½µ·²¹ò Ð´»¿»»»¬¸¿¬¬¸»»¿®»·²½±®°±®¿¬»¼·²¬±¬¸»º·²¿´°´¿²ò Í·²½»®»´§ô Î·½¸¿®¼Þ®«µ®«¼ Ý±³³»²¬ ýë ÈÔ ûÌÊÓÐ ùÓÈÃÍÖúÊ×Ï×ÊÈÍÎ ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎ ÈÔéÈÊ××ÈéÇÓÈ× úÊ×Ï×ÊÈÍÎåû ûÈÈÎìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎï×ÏÚ×ÊÉ ê×ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎìÇÚÐÓÙê×ÆÓ×ÅøÊÛÖÈïÛÊÙÔ ûÉÛÉÈÛÑ×ÔÍÐØ×ÊÑ×ÃÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÙÛÈÍÊÛÊÙÔÓÈ×ÙÈÚÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉÍÅÎ×ÊÛÎØÙÍÏÏ×ÊÙÓÛÐÌÊÍÌ×ÊÈÃÍÅÎ×ÊÓÎÈÔ×ïÛÎ×ÈÈ× ù×ÎÈ×ÊùÍÊ×óÛÏÉÇÚÏÓÈÈÓÎÕÏÃÙÍÏÏ×ÎÈÉÊ×ÕÛÊØÓÎÕÈÔ×ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎÛî×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØù×ÎÈ×ÊÖÍÊ ÃÍÇÊÙÍÎÉÓØ×ÊÛÈÓÍÎåÔÓÐ×ÏÃÓÎÆÍÐÆ×Ï×ÎÈØÇÊÓÎÕÈÔ×ÉÇÚÛÊ×ÛÌÐÛÎÎÓÎÕÌÊÍÙ×ÉÉÅÛÉÐÓÏÓÈ×ØÓÎÍÊØ×ÊÈÍ ÏÓÎÓÏÓÂ×ÛÎÃÌÍÈ×ÎÈÓÛÐÙÍÎÖÐÓÙÈÍÊÎ×ÕÛÈÓÆ×ÓÏÌÛÙÈÍÎÏÃÚÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉ×ÉÓÎÈÔÓÉÐ×ÈÈ×ÊóÅÓÐÐÈÊÃÈÍÉ×ÈÖÍÊÈÔÈÔ× Ø×ÖÓÙÓ×ÎÙÓ×ÉóÉ××ÓÎÈÔ×ÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈØÊÛÖÈÍÖÈÔÓÉÎ×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØÌÐÛÎ éÈÛÑ×ÔÍÐØ×ÊÉùÓÈÃéÈÛÖÖÛÎØÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÉÅÔÍÅÍÊÑ×ØÍÎïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎØÍÙÇÏ×ÎÈÅÔÓÐ×Ï×ÛÎÓÎÕÅ×ÐÐ ÅÓÈÔÈÔ×ÓÊÍÚÒ×ÙÈÓÆ×ÉÈÍÙÊ×ÛÈ×ÛÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃÙÔÛÊÛÙÈ×ÊÌÐÛÙ×ÉÖÍÊÌ×ÍÌÐ×ÛÎØÛÆÓÚÊÛÎÈÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃÙÍÊ×óÚ×ÐÓ×Æ× ÈÔ×ø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈéÈÛÎØÛÊØÉÉ×ÈÖÍÊÈÔÓÎÈÔÓÉØÍÙÇÏ×ÎÈÅÓÐÐÌÊ×ÙÐÇØ×ÈÔ×É×ÕÍÛÐÉÖÊÍÏÔÛÌÌ×ÎÓÎÕÓÎÛÙÈÇÛÐÌÊÛÙÈÓÙ× ðÓÉÈ×ØÚ×ÐÍÅÛÊ×ÏÃÓÎÓÈÓÛÐÈÔÍÇÕÔÈÉ ÙÍÏÏ×ÎÈÉÚÛÉ×ØÍÎÃ×ÛÊÉÍÖ×ÄÌ×ÊÓ×ÎÙ×ÓÎÛÊÙÔÓÈ×ÙÈÇÊ×ÛÎØØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈ ÈÍÅÛÊØÉÏÛÑÓÎÕÈÔÓÉÛÚ×ÈÈ×ÊÏÍÊ×Ê×ÛÐÓÉÈÓÙØÍÙÇÏ×ÎÈÈÍÅÛÊØÉÛÙÔÓ×ÆÓÎÕÈÔ×ÕÍÛÐÉÍÖÈÔ×ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃ úìÐÛÎæÓÉÓÍÎÉõÍÛÐÉ÷ÄÌ×ÙÈÛÈÓÍÎÉÌÛÕ× èÔ×íÚÒ×ÙÈÓÆ×ÉÉ×ÙÈÓÍÎÓÎÛÐÐÊ×ÛÐÓÈÃÛÊ×ÒÇÉÈÛØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈwÅÓÉÔÐÓÉÈvÓÐÐ×ÕÛÐÆÓ×ÅÌÊÍÈ×ÙÈÓÍÎÚÃÐÓÏÓÈÓÎÕ Ô×ÓÕÔÈÉÛÎØÓØ×ÛÉÈÍÏÛÑ×ÈÔÓÎÕÉÌÊ×ÈÈÃ èÔ×ÌÔÍÈÍÕÊÛÌÔÉÍÎÌÛÕ×ÛÊ×Ï×ÎÈÈÍÓÐÐÇÉÈÊÛÈ×ÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃÙÔÛÊÛÙÈ×ÊôÍÅ×Æ×ÊÈÔ×ø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈéÈÛÎØÛÊØÉ ÌÊ×ÙÐÇØ×ÈÔÓÉÖÍÊÏÍÖØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÖÊÍÏÔÛÌÌ×ÎÓÎÕÈÔ×É×ÌÓÙÈÇÊ×ÉÛÊ×ÍÖÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÉÈÔÛÈÛÊ×ÏÇÙÔÐÛÊÕ×ÊÈÔÛÎ ÉÖÏÛÄÛÎØÛÊ×ÏÍÉÈÐÓÑ×ÐÃÈÛÐÐ×ÊÈÔÛÎ tÏÛÄÉ×ÈÖÍÊÈÔÓÎÈÔÓÉÙÍØ×ÅÔÓÙÔÕÓÆ×ÉÛÖÛÐÉ×ÓÏÌÊ×ÉÉÓÍÎÛÚÍÇÈ ÅÔÛÈÓÉÌÍÉÉÓÚÐ×ÅÓÈÔÈÔÓÉÌÐÛÎ øìÐÛÎðÛÎØçÉ×ïÛÌø×ÉÓÕÎÛÈÓÍÎÉÌÛÕ× ðøêÛÊ×ÓÉÚ×ÓÎÕÊ×ÏÍÆ×ØÖÊÍÏù×ÎÈ×ÊÛÎØÌÐÛÙ×ØÓÎê ÂÍÎÓÎÕÈÔÇÉÈÔ×Ê×ÓÉÎÍÈÊÛÎÉÓÈÓÍÎÖÊÍÏÔÓÕÔØ×ÎÉÓÈÃ ÙÍÊ×ÛÊ×ÛÛÎØÉÇÊÊÍÇÎØÓÎÕÎ×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØðøêÉÔÍÇÐØÛÈÐ×ÛÉÈÚ×ïèêïèêÂÍÎ×ÈÍÉÍÇÈÔÉÔÍÇÐØÚ××ÄÌÛÎØ×Ø ÈÍÓÎÙÐÇØ×ÛÊ×ÛÚ×ÈÅ××ÎÇÌÌ×ÊéÔÍÊ×øÊÓÆ×ÛÎØì×ÊÊÃûÆ×ÎÇ×ÛÉÛÙÍÎÉÓÉÈ×ÎÈÚÇÖÖ×ÊÂÍÎ× ïèêÉÔÍÇÐØÚ××ÄÌÛÎØ×ØÈÍÓÎÙÐÇØ××ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕÙÍÎØÍÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÈÍÎÍÊÈÔÛÐÍÎÕÅÛÈ×ÊÖÊÍÎÈÛÎØÉÍÇÈÔÍÖÈÔÍÎÈÔ× Å×ÉÈÉÓØ×ÍÖì×ÊÊÃÚÍÇÎØ×ØÚÃ ÈÔéÈÊ××È ûïÛÎ×ÈÈ×ù×ÎÈ×ÊùÍÊ×ïùùÌÛÕ× ì÷êïóèè÷øçé÷é Ý±³³»²¬ ýë ì×ÊÏÓÈÈ×ØçÉ×ÉÈÔÓÉÐÍÍÑÉÐÓÑ×ÛÅÓÉÔÐÓÉÈÛÎØÓÉÊ×ÛÐÐÃÎÍÈÌÍÉÉÓÚÐ×ÅÓÈÔø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈéÈÛÎØÛÊØÉÛÉÌÊÍÌÍÉ×Ø ÈÔÓÉÓÉÚ×ÙÛÇÉ×ÈÔ×ÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÉÓÂ×Ô×ÓÕÔÈÛÎØÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÉÈÛÎØÛÊØÉÛÊ×ÈÍÍÊ×ÉÈÊÓÙÈÓÆ×ÓÎÙÍÏÚÓÎÛÈÓÍÎíÈÔ×ÊÎÍÈ×É ÓôÍÈ×ÐÛÎØÐÍØÕÓÎÕÌÐÛÙ×ùÍÎÈÛÓÎÓÎÕÈ×ÎÍÊÖ×Å×ÊÕÇ×ÉÈÊÍÍÏÉúÍÇÈÓËÇ×ÔÍÈ×ÐÉÛÊ×Õ×Î×ÊÛÐÐÃÛÊÍÇÎØ ÊÍÍÏÉèÔÓÉÅÍÇÐØÚ×ÛÕÊ×ÛÈïÛÎ×ÈÈ×Ê×ÉÈÛÇÊÛÎÈÉÉÌÛÉÛÎØÊ×ÈÛÓÎÉÔÍÌÉ ÑïÇÉ×ÇÏÍÊÕÛÐÐ×ÊÃÙÍÇÐØÎÍÈÚ×ÚÇÓÐÈÅÓÈÔÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÉÈÛÎØÛÊØÉÖÍÊÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÊ×ËÇÓÊ×Ï×ÎÈÉ ÎìÔÃÉÓÙÛÐöÓÈÎ×ÉÉÛÎØô×ÛÐÈÔùÐÇÚðÛÊÕ×ÊÉÙÛÐ×ÚÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉÈÔÛÈÙÍÇÐØÎÍÈÚ×Ø×Æ×ÐÍÌ×ØØÇ×ÈÍ ÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕ ÉÓÂ×Ê×ÉÈÊÓÙÈÓÍÎÉÓÎÙÍÏÚÓÎÛÈÓÍÎÅÓÈÔÈÔ×ÉÈÛÈ×ØÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÊ×ËÇÓÊ×Ï×ÎÈÉ íÈÔ×Ê×ÄÛÏÌÐ×ÉÍÖwÅÓÉÔÐÓÉÈvÇÉ×ÉÈÔÛÈÛÊ×ÎÍÈÖ×ÛÉÓÚÐ× ÌÍÉÉÓÚÐ×ØÇ×ÈÍÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÉÓÂ×Ê×ÉÈÊÓÙÈÓÍÎÉÛÎØÌÛÊÑÓÎÕ Ê×ËÇÓÊ×Ï×ÎÈÉÓÎÙÐÇØ×ê×ÉÈÛÇÊÛÎÈÉèÔ×ÛÈ×Êæ×È×ÊÓÎÛÊÃùÐÓÎÓÙÛÎØôÍÈ×Ð ìêíôóúóè÷øçé÷é ÔíÇÈØÍÍÊÉÈÍÊÛÕ×ðÓÏÓÈÛÈÓÍÎÛØÆ×ÊÉ×ÐÃÛÖÖ×ÙÈÉ×ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕÚÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉ×ÉûÊ××ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕÇÉ×ÉÕÊÛÎØÖÛÈÔ×Ê×Øý ø÷æ÷ðíìï÷îèéèûîøûêøéÌÛÕ× ÛïÛÄÓÏÇÏÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÔ×ÓÕÔÈÍÖ tÈÔÓÉÅÍÇÐØÛÐÐÍÅÍÎÐÃÛÈÔÊ××ÉÈÍÊÃÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÍÎÛÐ×Æ×ÐÐÍÈìÊÍÌ×ÊÈÓ×ÉÛÐÍÎÕ ÈÔ×îÍÊÈÔÉÓØ×ÍÖÈÔÉÈÊ××ÈÛÎØÔÛÆ×ÛÎÛÌÌÊÍÄÓÏÛÈ× tÕÊÛØ×ÙÔÛÎÕ×ÈÔÇÉÅÔ×ÎÈÛÑÓÎÕÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÕÊÛØ×ÓÎ ÛÙÙÍÇÎÈÈÔÓÉÅÍÇÐØÛÐÐÍÅÍÎÐÃÛÈÅÍÉÈÍÊÃÉÈÊÇÙÈÇÊ×ÍÎôÛÊÑÓÎÉÛÈÛÏÓÎÓÏÇÏÕÊÛØ×ÉÔÍÇÐØÚ×Ï×ÛÉÇÊ×ØÖÊÍÏ ÈÔ×ÔÓÕÔ×ÉÈÌÍÓÎÈÍÎÈÔ×ÉÓÈ×ôÍÅ×Æ×ÊÔ×ÓÕÔÈÐÓÏÓÈÉÉÔÍÇÐØÚ×É×ÈÈÍtÓÎÑ××ÌÓÎÕÅÓÈÔÛÔÓÕÔ×ÊØ×ÎÉÓÈÃÙ×ÎÈ×Ê ÆÉ tÓÎïèêÛÎØê ÂÍÎ×ÉÛÎØÖÍÊ×ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕÉÓÈ×ÕÊÛØ×ÙÍÎÉÓØ×ÊÛÈÓÍÎÉ ÖïÛÄÓÏÇÏÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÙÍÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÉÓÄÈÃ Ì×ÊÙ×ÎÈÈÍÛÏÛÄÓÏÇÏÍÖèÔÓÉÏÛÄÓÏÇÏÉÔÍÇÐØÚ×ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×Ø ÈÍ ÛÉÌÊÍÌÍÉ×ØÈÔÓÉÓÉÒÇÉÈ ÕÊ×ÛÈ×ÊÈÔ×ÎÈÔ×ÙÍÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÓÎÈÔ×ïèêÂÍÎ×öÍÊ×ÄÛÏÌÐ×ÐÍÈ ÙÍÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÖÍÊÛ tÅÓØ×ÚÃ tÐÍÈÓÎÈÔ×ôÛÊÑÓÎÉ ÈÔéÈÊ××ÈÚÐÍÙÑÅÍÇÐØÚ× ÉÖÍÖ ÉÖèÔÇÉ ÈÔ×ÏÛÄÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÖÍÍÈÌÊÓÎÈÅÍÇÐØÚ× tÄ tèÔÓÉÅÍÇÐØÊ×ËÇÓÊ×ÛÉ×ÈÚÛÙÑÍÖtÙÍÏÚÓÎ×ØÖÍÊÚÍÈÔÉÈÊ××ÈÉ øÍ×ÉÎÍÈ×ÛÉÓÐÃÏ××ÈÏÛÄ tÉ×ÈÚÛÙÑÉ×ÈÖÍÊÈÔÓÎÚöÊÍÎÈÃÛÊØé×ÈÚÛÙÑ×ÉÌ×ÙÓÛÐÐÃÅÔ×ÎÃÍÇÔÛÆ×ÛÎ×ÄÓÉÈÓÎÕ ÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÍÎÍÖÈÔ×ÉÈÊ××ÈÖÊÍÎÈÛÕ×É úÍÎÇÉ×ÉúÛÉ×ÓÉ çÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØìÛÊÑÓÎÕÍÊê×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÓÛÐÍÆ×ÊùÍÏÏ×ÊÙÓÛÐ ÕÊ××ÎÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÈ×ÙÔÎÓËÇ×É ÿÉÔÍÇÐØÛÐÐÍÅÐÍÈÙÍÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÅÔ×ÎÈÔ×É×ÈÔÊ××ÚÍÎÇÉ×ÉÛÊ×ÐÓÑ×ÐÃÈÍÍÙÙÇÊÅÓÈÔÈÔ×ÊÓÕÔÈØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈ ÉÈÛÎØÛÊØÉ ø÷éóõîéèûîøûêøéÙÍÎÈÌÛÕ× úÇÓÐØÓÎÕéÓÂ×éÈÊÇÙÈÇÊ×ÉÉÔÛÐÐÎÍÈ×ÄÙ××ØÖÓÖÈ××ÎÈÔÍÇÉÛÎØ ÉËÇÛÊ×Ö××ÈèÔÓÉÊ×ÉÈÊÓÙÈÓÍÎÉÔÍÇÐØÚ× Ê×ÏÍÆ×ØÖÊÍÏÈÔÓÉÙÍØ×èÔÓÉØ×È×ÊÊ×ÎÈÈÍØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÅÓÐÐÌÊ×ÙÐÇØ×ÛÎÃÊ×ÛÉÍÎÛÚÐ×Ø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÈÍÍÙÙÇÊèÛÑ× ÈÔ××ÄÛÏÌÐ× tÄ tÐÍÈÉÓÈ×ØÛÚÍÆ×ÓÎÖïÛÄÖÍÍÈÌÊÓÎÈÓÉ ÉÖÄÈÔÊ××ÉÈÍÊÓ×É×ËÇÛÐÉ ÉÖ ÙÐÍÉ× íñìÛÊÑÓÎÕ s ÉÖ ÙÛÊÛÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÛÊ×Û×ËÇÛÐÉ ÍÊ ÙÛÊÌÛÊÑÉíÎ× ÉÖÖÐÍÍÊÍÖ Ê×ÈÛÓÐ ÍÖÖÓÙ×ÙÍÏÏ×ÊÙÓÛÐÉÌÛÙ×ÅÍÇÐØÊ×ËÇÓÊ×Ì×Ê ÉÖÕÖÛ¾ s ÿÉÈÛÐÐÉÈÔÇÉÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÖÍÍÈÌÊÓÎÈ ÏÇÉÈÚ×Ê×ØÇÙ×ØÈÍ éÓÎÙ×ÈÔ×ÐÍÈÓÉÈÅÍÉÏÛÐÐÈÍÛÐÐÍÅÛÏÇÐÈÓÉÈÍÊÃÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÕÛÊÛÕ×Å ÊÛÏÌÉ×ÈÙÈÔ× ÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÙÍÇÐØÍÎÐÃÚ×ÈÅÍÉÈÍÊÓ×ÉÍÎ×ÖÐÍÍÊÖÍÊÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÛÎØÍÎ×ÖÐÍÍÊÖÍÊÊ×ÈÛÓÐ ÍÖÖÓÙ× ûÉÈÔ×ÛÚÍÆ××ÄÛÏÌÐ×ÓÐÐÇÉÈÊÛÈ×ÉÉÏÛÐÐÐÍÈØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÉØÍÎtÈÅÍÊÑÅÓÈÔÈÔ×ÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÊ×ËÇÓÊ×Ï×ÎÈÉèÔ×Ã ÙÍÇÐØÅÍÊÑÚÇÈÈÔ×ÏÛÄÓÏÇÏÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÛÊ×ÛÅÍÇÐØÎ××ØÈÍÚ×ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ØíÈÔ×ÊÅÓÉ×Ø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÛÈÛØ×ÎÉÓÈÃÈÔÛÈ ÓÉ×ÙÍÎÍÏÓÙÛÐÐÃÖ×ÛÉÓÚÐ×ÓÉÇÎÐÓÑ×ÐÃÈÍÍÙÙÇÊ ìÇÚÐÓÙûÏ×ÎÓÈÓ×ÉÊ×ËÇÓÊ×Ï×ÎÈÉÙÍØ×ÐÛÎÕÇÛÕ×ÙÍÇÐØ×ÛÉÓÐÃÙÛÇÉ×ÇÎÓÎÈ×ÎØ×ØÙÍÎÉ×ËÇ×ÎÙ×ÉÈÍÏÛÎÃ ÑÓÍÉÑÉÚ×ÎÙÔ×É×ÈÙÍÊÈÍÖ×ÅÓÖÐÛÊÕ×ÊÉÙÛÐ×ÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÉÛÊ×ØÍÎ× Ý±³³»²¬ ýë ùÍÊÎ×ÊèÊ×ÛÈÏ×ÎÈÉwÅÓÉÔÐÓÉÈvèÔÓÉÉÈÛÎØÛÊØÛÐÐÍÅÉÎÍÖÐ×ÄÓÚÓÐÓÈÃÛÎØÅÓÐÐÎÍÈÌÊÍÏÍÈ×ÛÎÃØÓÆ×ÊÉÓÈÃÍÊ ÓÎÈ×Ê×ÉÈÖÊÍÏÚÐÍÙÑÈÍÚÐÍÙÑèÔ×w÷ÎÈÊÃvÊ×ËÇÓÊ×Ï×ÎÈÈÍÚ× ÈÛÐÐ×ÊÈÔÛÎÊ×ÉÈÍÖÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÅÓÐÐÐÍÅ×ÊÏÛÄÔ×ÓÕÔÈ ÛÐÐÍÅ×ØÈÍ ÍÖ tÿ t tÿ tÔ×ÓÕÔÈÏÛÄÖÍÊÚÇÐÑÍÖÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÈÔÇÉÛÐÐÍÅÓÎÕÍÎÐÃÛÈÅÍÉÈÍÊÃ ÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕìÐÛÎÈÓÎÕÉ tÈÛÐÐÍÎÛÙÍÊÎ×ÊÓÉÎÍÈÛÐÐÍÅ×ØÚÃùÓÈÃÍÖúÊ×Ï×ÊÈÍÎ÷ÎÕÓÎ××ÊÓÎÕø×ÌÛÊÈÏ×ÎÈÖÍÊÈÊÛÖÖÓÙ ÉÛÖ×ÈÃÊ×ÆÓÉ×ÍÊÍÏÓÈ íööéèê÷÷èìûêñóîõê÷ëçóê÷ï÷îèéÌÛÕ× ÛìÛÊÑÓÎÕÉÔÛÐÐÏ××ÈÉÈÛÎØÛÊØÉÍÖùÔÛÌÈ×Ê ïîùì×Ê×ÄÛÏÌÐ×ÉÈÛÈ×ØÛÚÍÆ×ÈÔ×É×ÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÉÈÛÎØÛÊØÉÅÓÐÐ ÌÊ×ÙÐÇØ×ÏÍÉÈØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÍÌÌÍÊÈÇÎÓÈÓ×ÉÓÎÙÍÎÒÇÎÙÈÓÍÎÅÓÈÔÈÔ×ÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÉÓÂ×ÐÓÏÓÈÛÈÓÍÎûwî×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØ ìÛÊÑÓÎÕéÈÛÎØÛÊØÉvÙÍØ×ÉÔÍÇÐØÚ×Ø×Æ×ÐÍÌ×ØÈÛÑÓÎÕÓÎÈÍÛÙÙÍÇÎÈÈÔ×ÇÎÓËÇ×ÎÛÈÇÊ×ÅÛÐÑÛÚÓÐÓÈÃÛÎØ Î×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØÉÙÛÐ×ÍÖÙ×ÎÈ×ÊÌÊÍÒ×ÙÈÉÛÐÐÍÅÊ×ØÇÙ×ØÊ×ËÇÓÊ×Ï×ÎÈÉÖÍÊÙÍÏÏ×ÊÙÓÛÐÇÉ×É èÔ×Ê×ÛÐÉÍÉÔÍÇÐØÚ×ÉÍÏ×ÌÊÍÆÓÉÓÍÎÈÔÛÈÓÖÇÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÓÎÓÎÆÍÐÆ×ØÈÔ×ÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÛÊ×ÛÙÛÎÙÍÆ×Ê ÍÙÙÇÌÃ ÍÖÐÍÈÛÊ×Û úïûî÷èè÷èêûîéóèóíîûðê÷éóø÷îèóûðïèê ì÷êïóèè÷øçé÷éÌÛÕ× Õê×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÓÛÐÇÉ×ÉïÇÓÐÈÖÛÏÓÐÃÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÓÛÐØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÉÉÔÍÇÐØÚ×ÛÐÐÍÅ×ØÈÍÚ×É×ÌÛÊÛÈ×ØÆ×ÊÈÓÙÛÐÐÃ èÍÅÎÔÍÇÉ×ÉÛÎØÔÍÊÓÂÍÎÈÛÐÐÃÛØØùÍÎØÍtÉÈÍÐÓÉÈÖÍÊØ×ÉÓÕÎÖÐ×ÄÓÚÓÐÓÈÃÛÎØÆÛÊÓ×ÈÃ îÍÈ×ÈÔ×Ê×ÓÉÎÍÏÛÄÓÏÇÏÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÉÓÂ×ÓÎÈÔÓÉÂÍÎ×íñ îÍÈ×ÅÔÃÓÉÈÔ×Ê×ÛÉ×ÙÈÓÍÎÍÎéóõîéèûîøûêøéÓÎÈÔÓÉÉ×ÙÈÓÍÎÛÎØÎÍÈÓÎÈÔ×ïùùÉ×ÙÈÓÍÎýèÔ×úÇÓÐØÓÎÕ éÓÕÎÛÊ×ÛÉ ÉÖÛÊ×ÈÍÍÐÛÊÕ×ÖÍÊÈÔÓÉÂÍÎ× ùïûî÷èè÷ðíåø÷îéóèãê÷éóø÷îèóûðê ó îè÷îèìçêìíé÷ÌÛÕ× èÔÓÉÂÍÎ×ÉÔÍÇÐØÚ×ÛÚÇÖÖ×ÊÂÍÎ×ÈÍÉ×ÌÛÊÛÈ×ÈÔ×ïùùÖÊÍÏÈÔ×ÏÛÓÎê Î×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØóÖÈÔÓÉÂÍÎ×ÓÉÙÔÛÎÕ×Ø ÈÍê ÈÔ×ÎÈÔ×Ê×ÅÍÇÐØÚ×ÎÍÚÇÖÖ×ÊóÉÇÕÕ×ÉÈÈÔÓÉÂÍÎ×Ú×Ê×ÙÐÛÉÉÓÖÓ×ØÛÉÈÔ×ïèêÉÍÈÔ×Ê×ÓÉÛÇÉ×ÚÇÖÖ×Ê óÎÉÇÏÏÛÊÃÓÖÈÔ×Ê×Å×Ê×ÍÎÐÃÈÔÊ××ÈÔÓÎÕÉóÙÍÇÐØÙÔÛÎÕ×ÅÓÈÔÓÎÈÔÓÉØÍÙÇÏ×ÎÈÈÔ×ÃÅÍÇÐØÚ×ÈÍÐÓÖÈÈÔ×Ô×ÓÕÔÈ ÐÓÏÓÈÈÍÛÊ×ÛÉÍÎÛÚÐ×tÛÐÐÍÅÓÎÕ ÉÈÍÊÃÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÉÛÉÉ×ÈÖÍÊÈÔÓÎÈÔ×ÙÍÏÌÊ×Ô×ÎÉÓÆ×ÌÐÛÎÊ×ÏÍÆ×ÈÔ× ÉÖÚÇÓÐØÓÎÕÉÓÂ×ÐÓÏÓÈÛÈÓÍÎÈÔÓÉÓÉÈÍÍÉÏÛÐÐÖÍÊÛÎ×ÖÖÓÙÓ×ÎÈØ×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈÅÓÈÔÇÎØ×ÊÕÊÍÇÎØÌÛÊÑÓÎÕÛÎØÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ× ÈÔ×ÏÛÄÓÏÇÏÐÍÈÙÍÆ×ÊÛÕ×ÈÍÖÍÊÆÛÊÓÍÇÉÊ×ÛÉÍÎÉÉÈÛÈ×ØÛÚÍÆ×èÔ×É×ÙÔÛÎÕ×ÉÛÐÍÎÕÅÓÈÔÈÔ×ÍÈÔ×ÊÉÈÔÛÈ ÛÊ×Ï×ÎÈÓÍÎ×ØÅÍÇÐØÕÓÆ×ÈÔÓÉÌÐÛÎÛÖÓÕÔÈÓÎÕÙÔÛÎÙ×ÓÎÖÍÉÈ×ÊÓÎÕÕÊÍÅÈÔÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ØÊ×ÉÓØ×ÎÈÓÛÐØ×ÎÉÓÈÓ×É ÓÎÙÊ×ÛÉ×ØÙÍÏÏ×ÊÙÓÛÐØ×ÎÉÓÈÓ×ÉÈÔÇÉÏÛÑÓÎÕÈÔÓÉÛÆÓÚÊÛÎÈÙÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃÙÍÊ×ÆÉÈÔ×ÙÇÊÊ×ÎÈÉÓÈÇÛÈÓÍÎÅ×Ê×Å×ÔÛÆ× Ê×ÆÍÐÆÓÎÕÚÇÉÓÎ×ÉÉÉÈÛÊÈÇÌÉÛÎØÖÛÓÐÇÊ×ÉÚ×ÙÛÇÉ×ÈÔ×Ê×ÓÉÎÍÈ×ÎÍÇÕÔØ×ÎÉÓÈÃÈÔÇÉÉÃÎ×ÊÕÃÈÍÏÛÑ×ÈÔÓÎÕÉÅÍÊÑ èÔÛÎÑÉÛÕÛÓÎÖÍÊÃÍÇÊÙÍÎÉÓØ×ÊÛÈÓÍÎ ò×ÖÖÊ×Ãûô×ÙÑ×Ê ò×ÖÖÊ×Ãûô×ÙÑ×ÊûÊÙÔÓÈ×ÙÈ ìÊÓÎÙÓÌÛÐ Ý±³³»²¬ ý ê From: Carolyn J. Maxon To: "jennifer balliet"; CC: Andrea Spencer; Lindsey Sehmel; Subject: RE: Draft Subarea Plan Review Date: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 11:02:25 AM Attachments: × ©¿ «²¿¾´» ¬± ¿¬¬»²¼ ¬¸» ´¿¬ ³»»¬·²¹ô ± ¸¿¼ ¬± ®»ª·»© ¬¸» ¼±½«³»²¬ ±² ¬¸» Þ®»³»®¬±² ©»¾ ·¬»ò × ¸¿ª» ¿ ¼·ºº·½«´¬ ¬·³» ¬®§·²¹ ¬± ®»¿¼ ±² ³§ ½±³°«¬»® ± ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ¬¿¬»³»²¬ñ¯«»¬·±² ³¿§ ²±¬ ¾» ®»ª»´¿²¬ò Ì¸» ³¿° ±² Ð¿¹» ïê · ©¸¿¬ × ®»³»³¾»® ¿º¬»® ¬¸» ª±¬·²¹ ¿¬ ¬¸» ´¿¬ ³»»¬·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ × ¿¬¬»²¼»¼ ¿²¼ × ¿³ ·² º¿ª±® ±º ¬¸¿¬ ¼»½··±²ò Ì¸» ²¿®®¿¬·ª» ±² Ð¿¹» ïé «²¼»® ¬¸» Ó¿²»¬¬» Ì®¿²·¬·±²¿´ Î»·¼»²¬·¿´ øÓÌÎ÷ ¬¿¬» ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» Û¿¬ ¾±«²¼¿®·» ¿®» þ¾§ Í½±¬¬ ¬®»»¬þò Ì¸» ³¿° ¿°°»¿® ¬± ¸±© ¬¸» Û¿¬ ¾±«²¼¿®§ ±º Ð·¬¬ ßª»²«» ²± Í½±¬¬ ßª»²«»ò ß³ × ®»¿¼·²¹ ¬¸» ²¿®®¿¬·ª» ½±®®»½¬´§ô ·º ²±¬ þ»¨½«» ¬¸» ®·²¹òþ Ý±³³»²¬æ Í·²½» ¬¸»®» · ¿² ¿½¬«¿´ Í½±¬¬ Í¬®»»¬ô °»®¸¿° ¬¸· ¸±«´¼ ¾» ½´¿®·º·»¼ ¬± ®»¿¼ Í½±¬¬ ßª»²«» ·² Ð¿®¬ ××ô Í»½¬·±² Üò Ì¸¿²µ º±® §±«® ½±²·¼»®¿¬·±²ò Ý¿®±´§² Ó¿¨±² From: jennifer balliet [mailto:manetteneighborhoodcoalition@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 10:41 AM Cc: andrea.spencer@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Lindsey Sehmel Subject: Draft Subarea Plan Review Dear Neighbors: At long last a draft plan for the subarea of Manette is available for your review. Go to the City of Bremerton website, click on Community Development, then Subarea plans, then Manette. The link to the draft document is at the top of the page. Please note that all comments are due to Lindsey Sehmel by 5:00 next Wed. , April 8th. There has been a lot of work gone into this document and while many of our concerns have been addressed it still leaves some issues, such as view Ý±³³»²¬ ý ê preservation unresolved. While we were able to get a firm 35' building height included and the size of the largest commercial buildings reduced to 15,000 sq. ft., the future of Manette as a quaint eclectic neighborhood is far from assured. Just to put the building size in perspective, the existing Market building is approx. 7,000 sq. ft. and the small mall next to it is approx. 9,500 sq. ft. excluding the overhangs in front of each . The building where the wine shop was and Manette Antiques currently is is almost exactly 35' high.You may be able to envision what a building twice the foot print of the market at 35' in height would do to the views of adjacent properties. There are many positive aspects to the draft plan including street, sidewalk, and lighting improvements as well as some good points on building style etc. Please take the time to read the draft and comment, however briefly before next Wed. The draft and comments will go to the regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting April 21 at 5:30 p.m. at the Norm Dicks building and then on to the City Council. Public comments will be allowed at both meetings, but written comments are generally more effective. If any of your neighbors need a hard copy of the draft document I have a few at my home (377-0414) or they can be obtained from the City. Thank you to all who gave up many hours of your time to make this process successful. Jordy Andrew MNC Chair Manette Neighborhood Coalition http://www.manetteneighborhoodcoalition.org bcc: coalition membership list ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ Ûî×ÓÕÔÚÍÊÔÍÍØù×ÎÈ×Ê ùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃùÔÛÊÛÙÈ×Ê ìÐÛÙ×ÉÖÍÊì×ÍÌÐ× æÓÚÊÛÎÈùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃùÍÊ× ìðûîîóîõùíïïóééóíîô÷ûêóîõøêûöèûìêóð ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ MAYOR CARY BOZEMAN CITY COUNCIL Cecil McConnell, District 2, President Nick Wofford, District 9, Vice-President Brad Gehring, District 1 Adam C. Brockus, District 3 Roy Runyon, District 4 Mike Shepherd, District 5 Dianne Robinson, District 6 Carol Arends, District 7 Will Maupin, District 8 PLANNING COMMISSION Greg Wheeler, Chairman Jessica Kennedy, Vice-Chairman John W. Cockburn Lois E. Hoell Andy Kosusko Bill Mosiman Linda Streissguth, AICP MANETTE KEY COMMUNICATORS John Ales Jordy Andrew Richard Bruskrud Councilman Adam Brockus Jeff Hecker Ken Hills Holly James Ruth Reese Jane Rebelowski Commissioner Greg Wheeler Mauntrece Zamzow CITY OF BREMERTON Andrea L. Spencer, AICP, Director of Community Development Lindsey Sehmel, Planner I, Community Development ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ PART I: INTRODUCTION A. Site Location ................................................................................................5 B. Comprehensive Plan Context ......................................................................5 PART II: COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING A. A Citizen-Developed Plan ...........................................................................6 B. Plan visions, goals, and expectations .........................................................7 i. Community Character ......................................................................7 ii. Places for People .............................................................................8 iii. Vibrant Community Core ..................................................................8 C. Plan Consistency with Bremerton Comprehensive Plan ............................9 i. Community Character ......................................................................9 ii. Land Use ........................................................................................10 iii. Housing ..........................................................................................11 iv. Transportation ................................................................................12 v. Environment ...................................................................................13 vi. Economic Development .................................................................13 vii. City Services ..................................................................................14 D. Plan Land Use Map & Designations .........................................................16 PART III: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Manette Center Core (MCC) .....................................................................18 B. Manette Transitional Residential (MTR)....................................................22 C. Manette Low Density Residential (LDR) ...................................................25 D. Street Standards .......................................................................................26 ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ This Page Intentionally Left Blank ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. SITE LOCATION Manette is a Bremerton neighborhood east of the Port Washington Narrows. The Manette peninsula is characterized by single-family residential neighborhoods with a distinct small- scale commercial district that enjoy spectacular views to the Narrows, Sinclair Inlet, downtown Bremerton and other scenic points. The plan boundary area encompasses approximately 34 acres B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONTEXT Bremerton’s 2004 Comprehensive Plan established the “Centers Concept” for the future growth of the city, and designated an area of the Manette community as a “Neighborhood Center.” It is envisioned that this area will include mixed-use structures, pedestrian-oriented design, varied housing types, and neighborhood scale commercial, professional, and community services. The services that are provided in a center of this type are intended to serve the territory within approximately 1/2 mile radius surrounding the center. Neighborhood centers have an identi¿ able central (or “core”) area with building heights of two or three stories with retail or of¿ ce uses at ground level and residential above. The density of VICINITY MAP housing is lower as distance from the core area increases. Away from the core area, residential uses will predominate. Manette’s citizens worked cooperatively with the City in the development of this sub-area plan. The purpose of this plan is to establish the overall plan vision for the center, demonstrate the plan’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and establish the design and development standards for the center. This plan has been developed to show how the area can provide living environments attractive to a growing segment of society that desires a more active, stimulating setting, offering the ability to access key amenities and conveniences without driving. SUB-AREA PLAN BOUNDARY MAP ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. A CITIZEN DEVELOPED PLAN The Manette neighborhood has a well- and what the area’s growth expectations are. established group of community leaders During November & December 2008, the Key and actively engaged citizens. The process Communicators took these “meetings” out to for this plan’s development included utilizing the public and held informal information-sharing citizens for outreach communication efforts sessions within the plan area at local businesses, within their neighborhood and to develop dinner parties, and their own homes. The the plan principles and goals that shaped outcome of these community meetings helped the regulations that are contained within de¿ ne the goals, visions, and expectations of this document. This approach proved very the plan. successful, and without the considerable time and effort that this community put into PUBLIC MEETINGS public participation the development of this A series of open public meetings were held at the plan would have not been a success. Norm Dicks Government Center to gather input from the citizens regarding the sub-area plan. The plan was developed through the use The meetings are summarized as follows: of two very important public outreach tools: “Key Communicators,” and open •January 12, 2009 public meetings where participants worked General open house through many exercises that shaped the •January 26, 2009 plan elements. Needs assessment charrette KEY COMMUNICATORS•February 23, 2009 Geographic application charrette The City worked with a group of Manette residents who were willing to commit •March 16, 2009 additional time to the sub-area planning Development standards & streets charrette effort – this group was called the “Key •March 30, 2009 Communicators.” The purpose of this group Draft plan review was to work closely with staff to develop •April 21, 2009 materials to share important information Planning Commission with the public about the sub-area planning Hearing & Recommendation effort and to communicate the importance of public participation. The ideas behind •May 2009 to June 2009 the Key Communicators were that Manette Anticipated City Council adoption residents would likely be more willing to talk with their neighbors about neighborhood planning than they would be with city staff, and that the Key Communicators would serve as an excellent conduit for sharing information that wouldn’t otherwise exist without their participation. City staff developed a “Meeting in a Binder” for use by the Key Communicators. This “meeting” was created to help the Communicators share information about the Growth Management Act, the City’s Comprehensive Plan, how the sub area planning process works, details of existing conditions within the Manette neighborhood, ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. PLAN VISIONS, GOALS & EXPECTATIONS Community outreach efforts focused on information-sharing and collaborative steps towards de¿ ning the 20-year vision for Manette. Surveys, questionnaires and roundtable discussions were the primary methods used to gather information regarding the citizen’s goals and expectations for growth. In the development of this plan, the citizens developed a number of key principles to follow. The principles were categorized into three groups – “Community Character,” “Places for People,” and “Vibrant Community Core.” The following describes in detail the goals and policies that will guide growth within the Manette Neighborhood Center: i. COMMUNITY CHARACTER (CC) GUIDING PRINCIPLE AND OVERALL GOAL: Preservation of a unique and charming neighborhood where signi¿ cant consideration should be given to the scale, size, quality, and compatibility of future development. OBJECTIVES: CC1 : Encourage development to compliment the scale of the surrounding neighborhood. CC2 : Promote view preservation by limiting building heights to 3 stories (Maximum 35’ height). CC3 : Encourage high quality architecture through the use of: Large windows along any ground À oor commercial û facade facing the public sidewalk or sidewalks providing circulation within a site. Bulk reduction. Building modulation shall be û used to reduce the appearance of mass and bulk of the structure. Easily identi¿ able building entrances from the û street and sidewalks. CC4 : In-¿ ll development should provide a variety of housing options. Encourage Mixed-Use development within the û commercial core Encourage single family homes, cottage style û homes, single family attached, and accessory dwelling units (ADU’s) in the area surrounding the commercial district where appropriate. CC5 : Encourage the use of sustainable development practices such as green roofs, green buildings, and LEED certi¿ cation throughout the plan area. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. PLAN VISIONS, GOALS & EXPECTATIONS CONT.... ii. PLACES FOR PEOPLE (PFP) GUIDING PRINCIPLE AND OVERALL GOAL: Establish an eclectic and active community space that provides opportunities for social gatherings within a walkable environment. OBJECTIVES: PFP1 : Improve the public right of way to be pedestrian and bicycle friendly: Encourage the widening of sidewalks. û Encourage the development of bicycle û lanes. iii. VIBRANT COMMUNITY CORE (VCC) PFP2 : Encourage the creation of public spaces with redevelopment. GUIDING PRINCIPLE PFP3 : Promote undergrounding of utilities AND OVERALL GOAL: to enhance the pedestrian environment Promote a compact, walkable commercial and overall community aesthetics. core that will provide diverse services for the surrounding neighborhood in a sustainable PFP4 : Encourage the addition of public fashion. amenities such as, art, neighborhood identity signs, benches, planters, OBJECTIVES: streetlights, etc. to the public right of way.VCC1 : Allow an eclectic mix of uses in the commercial core that are appropriate for a neighborhood center. VCC2 : Promote redevelopment in the commercial core that is in scale with its surroundings by limiting building heights to 3 stories (Maximum 35’ height). VCC3 : Consider ways to make street improvements that support local businesses. Recon¿ gure on-street parking to make û user-friendly and increase supply. Encourage the placement of public û amenities in the right-of-way. VCC4 : Reduce the predominance of motor vehicles within the commercial core. Consider use of traf¿ c-calming measures. û Screen parking areas to improve visual û aesthetics. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The purpose of this section of the sub-area plan is to demonstrate that the principles, goals, and ultimately the zoning regulations presented in the plan are in compliance with and further the goals of the City’s overall Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is organized into chapters (formally referred to as “Elements”) and this section follows the same organization. Speci¿ c goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan have been reproduced in this document for reference with the information regarding how the speci¿ c sub-area plan goals meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan policies. i. COMMUNITY CHARACTER ELEMENT The Manette Sub-Area Plan addresses the needs and goals of the Community Character element of the comprehensive plan clearly through the following measures: The Manette community has addressed the desire for a unique and charming neighborhood û Sub-area Plan Goals: that keeps with the scale and compatibility of the current developments. CC1, CC3, CC4 A variety of housing types should be available within the community, striving to keep living û options open for a wide array of age groups and income levels. This is accomplished by allowing for cottage-style homes, attached single family homes, and additional dwelling units on single Sub-area Plan Goals: CC1, CC3, CC4 family lots. The orientation of buildings and structures should cater the pedestrian atmosphere to provide û a safer environment, enhancing the ‘eyes on the street’ and encouraging interaction within the Sub-area Plan Goals: VCC3, VCC4, PFP1, PFP4 community. The streetscape along 11 Street shall include attractive landscaping, neighborhood identity th û signs, wider sidewalks, lighting ¿ xtures, and a separation between the pedestrian pathway and Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP2, PFP4, VCC3, VCC4 traf¿ c lanes. Redevelopment efforts should focus on increasing open space, providing attractive pedestrian û Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP2, PFP4, environments, and adding to the sense of community. PFP5 City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Community Character Policies CC1B Ensure that new development is of a type, scale, orientation, and design that improves upon the neighborhood’s desired and de¿ ned character, aesthetics, and qualities. CC2 Assure that new development relates to surrounding uses and provides for urban livability. CC2B Ensure that in¿ ll construction and area redevelopment are done in a manner that reinforces the neighborhood’s desired and de¿ ned character and that architecturally compliments the surrounding commercial and residential areas. CC2C Encourage building and site design that allows a variety of housing forms and also is compatible with the character of the immediate surrounding area, thereby generating community support for new types of housing development. CC2E Buildings should demonstrate efforts to accommodate a human scale and urban livability. CC3 Provide for a safe, pleasant, and rich pedestrian experience. CC3A Encourage a sense of neighborliness and community by orienting one or more building entrances to commercial buildings towards the pedestrian sidewalks and pathways that lead to adjoining neighborhoods. CC3B Promote pedestrian-oriented environments in Centers through the creation of streetscapes and building designs that make walking an attractive and convenient transportation mode. CC3C Encourage attractive pedestrian-oriented development. CC4 Promote the development of areas of special character, encouraging a diversity of communities within the city. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... ii. LAND USE ELEMENT The Manette neighborhood is a well established historical neighborhood center. The sub- area plan addresses the need for future commercial and residential growth in a manner that does not disrupt the nature of the neighborhood. Through planning efforts residents expressed a desire for future commercial services to û include local eclectic shops such as a high quality grocery store, local retail, pharmacy/ drug store, post of¿ ce, and dry cleaning services, in addition to coffee houses, book Sub-area Plan Goals: VCC1, stores, community gathering spaces, and ‘third places’. VCC3, VCC4. There should be an increase in open and green space (such as parks), streetscape û improvements (benches, planters, wider sidewalks) and communal gathering spaces Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP2, PFP3, PFP4. throughout the neighborhood. The commercial core should work towards providing the daily services that the û surrounding community needs, further reducing the impact and requirement for motorized Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, transportation, and enhancing the pedestrian environment. PFP2, PFP4, VCC1, VCC3, VCC4. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Land Use Policies LU1F Identify and promote the architectural and scale characteristics of surrounding neighborhoods for the development of Centers serving a neighborhood or a community. LU1K Promote neighborhoods which foster interaction among residents, contribute to well-being of citizenry, and create and sustain a sense of community and personal safety. LU1L Strategically locate amenities such as parks, sidewalks, community centers, and gathering places to support residential areas. Provide for social interaction through street design elements. û Encourage residential designs with an orientation towards social interaction, as opposed û to the automobile. LU4 Provide for walkability throughout Centers and neighborhoods. LU4A Improve pedestrian access to commercial and community services within Centers and neighborhoods. LU4B Develop pedestrian connections between residential areas and neighborhood services. LU9E In general, the intensity of land uses should be varied, with more intense uses nearer the core of the Center and less intense at the edge. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... iii. HOUSING ELEMENT The housing element of the Manette sub-area plan addresses the future needs of the community and expected growth targets within the historically concentrated neighborhood. By allowing creative in¿ ll through cottage style homes, attached and detached single û family homes, townhomes, and ADU’s, the neighborhood will be able to address the needs of aging citizens, young families, and singles with a variety of reasonably priced Sub-area Plan Goals: CC4, VCC1 housing options. In addition to addressing the housing needs the community will increase the walkability û within the neighborhood, provide a safer pedestrian environment, and activate the Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP3, PFP4 streetscape. The allowed density in the MTR zone will accommodate the need for future growth û Sub-area Plan Goals: CC4 allocated to the Manette neighborhood. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Housing Policies H3 Provide a variety of housing types and densities to meet changing needs of Bremerton residents. H3C Stimulate the production of new housing for all incomes, ages, and family types. H4 Provide housing in mixed-use centers for a variety of incomes, age groups, and household types. H7 Promote safe, attractive, livable neighborhoods that will attract homeowners. H7D Improve the visual quality of residential areas where needed. Accent viewsheds in the design of residential areas. û Identify and establish view corridors along residential streets. û Advocate for the undergrounding of utilities. û H8 Promote social interaction as well as neighborhood identity and initiatives. H8C Encourage walk-ability within neighborhoods. H8D Use neighborhood plans to outline public and private projects for each neighborhood. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... iv. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The Manette neighborhood is within walking distance of the regional transit terminal in downtown Bremerton. With well established bus services, sidewalks, and high traf¿ c volumes, Manette residents addressed needs such as traf¿ c calming measures through the neighborhood streets and E 11th St., better connection to parks, and realignment of parking along the arterial streets. The Transportation Element addresses traf¿ c calming measures such as curb bulbs, û landscaping improvements, and mid-block crosswalks. These alterations will create a Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP4, safer pedestrian and motor vehicle environment. VCC3, VCC4 The sub-area plan encourages alternatives to the automobile by sustaining the development û Sub-area Plan Goals: CC4, VCC1, VCC2. of transit supportive densities. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Transportation Policies T2B ReÀ ect the urban nature of roadways within Bremerton by encouraging, where appropriate: Street trees and landscaping û Traf¿ c calming strategies and devices û On-street public parking û Street lighting û Accommodations for transit stops û Crosswalks and sidewalks û T2C Restore/create unique neighborhood aesthetics via formation of distinctive streetscapes and traf¿ c controlling devices. T3D Where possible, the City shall require the under-grounding of overhead utilities to reduce the need for removal and maintenance of roadside vegetation. T4 Protect residential neighborhoods from negative transportation impacts. T4A Minimize the impacts of traf¿ c on residential neighborhoods by discouraging the use of local access streets by non-local traf¿ c. T4C Reduce speed on neighborhood streets through the use of street design devices such as curb bulbs, “median obstacles,” or other measures proven to be safe and effective at reducing travel speeds. T12 Provide a transportation system that effectively serves the needs of and encourages pedestrian, bicycle and other non-motorized travel. T12B Ensure that designated Centers are walkable, and encourage connectivity. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... v. ENVIRONMENT ELEMENT The Manette Sub-Area Plan shall be sustainable in design and implementation. It is encouraged to enact sustainable development standards with concern of the û environment, increase the amount of public open space, and provide physical and visual Sub- access to the shorelines through access improvements within the plan boundary. area Plan Goals: CC5, PFP1, PFP2, PFP3. Sub-area Streetscapes will be inviting, accessible, and functional for the neighborhood. û Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP3, PFP4, VCC3, VCC4. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Environment Policies E8B Provide both physical and visual access to shorelines. E10B Encourage dense development around designated Centers, which incorporate open space. E11C Encourage streetscapes that are human-scale, enable walking, and bicycling, and are aesthetically pleasing. . E11D Create sidewalks and improved shoulders along right-of-ways to enable walking vi. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT The community developed the commercial components of the Manette Sub-Area Plan to align neatly with the comprehensive goals of the city. They focused on preserving the current commercial uses while incorporating new uses that would better serve the community. Future economic growth should support the function, charm and eclectic nature of the û Sub-area Plan Goals: CC1, CC3, VCC1, VCC2, VCC3. commercial core as it is today. Locating live/work and extensive mixed use developments within the MCC zone will û generate more supportive functions of commerce by increasing the serving population. Sub-area Plan Goals: CC4, VCC1, VCC2. Maintaining the consistency of the neighborhood by restricting development to 35’ in û Sub-area Plan Goals: CC2, VCC2. height. Sub-area Plan Goals: VCC3, VCC4. Parking must be accommodative and attractive. û City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ Economic Development Policies EC1J Ensure business zoning designations are in appropriate locations. EC2 Maintain the existing asset of being a small city with convenience and quality. EC2C Encourage mixed use developments (residential combined with commercial activities) in designated Centers. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH COMP. PLAN CONT... vii. CITY SERVICES ELEMENT The Manette Sub-Area Plan is the product of a community-based planning effort. To create the plan the Key Communicators led the early information-sharing efforts, and the community- at-large actively participated in public meetings. Both helped shape the visions and goals of this plan. The sub-area plan for Manette calls for in¿ ll development that will keep with the scale, û nature, and charm of the neighborhood, further contributing the ef¿ ciency of services Sub-area Plan Goals: CC2, CC4, PFP 1, PFP 2, PFP 4. within the City of Bremerton. Pedestrian centralized improvements will increase the safety and movement of people. û Sub-area Plan Goals: PFP1, PFP3, PFP4, VCC1, VCC3, VCC4. City Of Bremerton 2004 Comprehensive Plan ~ City Services Policies CS8 Provide meaningful opportunities for community involvement. CS15A Emphasize conformity of design within sub-areas of the City, especially neighborhoods. Improve sidewalks throughout the City, especially accessibility features. û CS17B Work with appropriate City departments to produce and implement development standards for neighborhood development. Stress safety, access, recreation, and pedestrian friendliness. û Address such topics as lighting, sidewalks, and street design in a manner that assures û consistency with this Comprehensive Plan. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ This Page Intentionally Left Blank ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. PLAN LAND USE MAP & DESIGNATIONS ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. PLAN LAND USE MAP & DESIGNATIONS MANETTE CENTER CORE (MCC) The Manette Center Core is centralized around the commercial areas of E 11th and is a total of 14 acres. The zone is constrained to the north mid-block between E 11th and 13th streets, to the south by 10th Street, to the east mid-block between Scott and Perry Avenues, and to the West by Port Washington Narrows. MANETTE TRANSITIONAL RESIDENTIAL (MTR) The Manette Transitional Residential is centralized around the center core totaling 14 acres. The zone is constrained to the north by the Wheaton-Win¿ eld triangle, to the west by the Port Washington Narrows, and to the east by Pitt Avenue. MANETTE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) The Manette Low Density Residential is centralized north of the MCC and is a total of 6 acres. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. MANETTE CENTER CORE (MCC) INTENT & PURPOSE The intent of the Manette Center Core (MCC) zone is to implement the vision for this area established by the Manette Sub-Area Plan principles and goals. The development standards for the central core of this neighborhood center are to create a lively mixed-use and retail street frontage in a safe, walkable environment, and to encourage pedestrian-scale building design. These regulations to work in conjunction with the city’s zoning code and other development regulations contained within the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC). If provisions of this plan conÀ ict with provisions elsewhere in the BMC, the provisions of this plan will apply. When it is unclear which regulations apply, then the presumption will be that the regulations of this chapter take precedence, with the ultimate determination to be made by the Director. PERMITTED USESPROHIBITED USES The following uses are permitted:The following uses are prohibited: (a) Bed and breakfast;(a) Light and heavy industrial/manufacturing uses; (b) Co-location of wireless (b) Drive-through facility; telecommunications facilities per (c) Automobile sales, service, repair or car wash; BMC20.46.140; (d) Storage of equipment and materials; (c) Community facility; (e) Adult entertainment; (d) Drinking place; (f) Work release facility; (e) Entertainment use; (g) Commercial surface parking lot not serving a (f) Finance insurance and real estate; permitted use (g) General of¿ ce and business service; (h) Outdoor storage. Storage is allowed only within (h) General retail;a fully enclosed permanent structure. Garbage cans and dumpsters shall be placed in an enclosure (i) Hotel and lodging place containing ten as per BMC 20.46.120. No garbage enclosure or fewer guest rooms; shall be permitted between a street and the primary (j) Medical of¿ ce and clinic; pedestrian access of a building. (k) Museum and gallery; (l) Park, playground and open space; (m) Personal service; (n) Physical Fitness and Health Club; (o) Public administration; (p) Residential as a secondary use; (q) Restaurant; (r) Theater; (s) Veterinary clinic. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. MCC CONTINUED.... DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (3) Projects providing a through-block corridor that facilitates pedestrian access Maximum building height (a): Thirty-¿ ve (35) feet. in a location approved by the city: Five Front yard setback (b): No minimum front yard (5) percent bonus. setback. The maximum front yard setback shall (4) Projects providing at least ¿ fty be ten (10) feet. At least eighty (80) percent of the (50) percent of their required parking building’s front facade shall meet the maximum front underground or within the building: yard setback. Twenty (20) percent bonus. Side yard setback (c): Zero (0), except when (5) Projects providing green building adjacent to the low density residential zone (R-10) techniques and elements: Fifteen (15) where a ten (10) foot setback is required for the ¿ rst percent bonus story and a twenty (20) foot setback is required for additional stories. Maximum development coverage (g): Maximum coverage by impervious surfaces Rear yard setback (d): Zero (0), except when seventy-¿ ve (75) percent; provided, that adjacent to the low density residential zone (R-10) through the use of any combination of the where a ten (10) foot setback is required for the ¿ rst mechanisms listed in subsections (f)(1) story and a twenty (20) foot setback is required for through (5) of this section, up to ninety- additional stories ¿ ve (95) percent maximum development maximum density (e) There is no for residential as coverage may be allowed. a secondary use. Height Measurement: (h) The height of Maximum building coverage (f): Sixty (60) percent a building or structure shall be measured base maximum; provided, that through the use of as the distance from the average ¿ nal any combination of the following, building coverage grade to the highest point of the structure. may be increased up to eighty-¿ ve (85) percent Exceptions: penthouse for elevators, maximum by providing any of the following: ¿ rewalls, chimneys, and À agpoles may (1) Projects containing mixed-use (commercial exceed maximum height limits. None of and residential): Twenty (20) percent bonus. these exceptions to the height regulations shall be used for advertising of any kind. (2) Projects providing a pedestrian-oriented plaza or area of at least one hundred ¿ fty (150) square feet along a pedestrian walkway, at an intersection corner, bus stop, or other key pedestrian area approved by the city. Such areas shall contain seating for at least four (4) people, a trash receptacle and three (3) or more of the following: A pedestrian shelter, a drinking fountain, a bike rack, pedestrian-scale lights, pavers on the walkway surfaces, a kiosk, a street vendor station providing food or beverages, trees, a statue or sculpture, a public restroom, or other elements that the city agrees would create a sense of place. Interior courtyards with these amenities qualify if they would be readily apparent and accessible to pedestrians on adjoining sidewalks: Fifteen (15) percent bonus. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. MCC CONTINUED.... DESIGN STANDARDS The purpose of these design standards is to create a lively mixed-use and retail street presence in a safe, walkable environment, and to encourage pedestrian-scale building design. The following design standards shall be applied to all new development or signi¿ cant redevelopment. When development involves the remodel or expansion of existing structures, the Director may modify these requirements to reasonably ¿ t the scope and scale of the remodel or expansion. Building Size (1). Structures shall not weather protection for pedestrians with a marquee, exceed¿ fteen thousand (15,000) square awning, building projection or other permanent feet gross À oor area. structural element, over approximately eighty (80) percent of the frontage of the subject property. The Entrances (2). Building entrances shall weather protection must cover at least ¿ ve feet of be easily identi¿ able from the street and the width of the sidewalk and be located a minimum sidewalks. This may be accomplished of ten (10) feet above the sidewalk. The width may through the use of such features as: vary to accommodate street trees, streetlights, etc. Ornamentation and/or architectural detailing around the door, recessing or Public Amenities (7). At least one (1) of the following protruding the entrance area at least three amenities shall be required along any ground À oor (3) feet, or including a canopy, portico or facade facing the public sidewalk: Outdoor eating overhang extending at least ¿ ve (5) feet areas; street furniture such as benches, bike racks over the sidewalk in the entrance area. and trash receptacles; plantings in window boxes; public art; or public display cases, or information Windows (3). Any ground À oor facade kiosks. facing the public sidewalk(s) shall include window(s) that allow views into interior Corner Treatments (8). Structures at the building spaces. At least seventy-¿ ve (75) intersection of two (2) streets shall include a percent of all such facades, measured signi¿ cant architectural feature at the building to ten (10) feet above the sidewalk or corner that provides visual emphasis at the corner. surface grade, shall be comprised of such This may be accomplished through the inclusion of windows. a major entryway at the corner, a building element the height of which varies from the remainder of the Bulk (4). Building modulation shall be used building by at least ten (10) percent, or a plaza at the to reduce the appearance of mass and bulk corner that includes a fountain, artwork, or planting of the structure. This may be accomplished of at least ten (10) feet in height. through the additional setback of upper À oors by at least ten (10) feet, recessed or protruding doorways, use of upper À oor balconies, or varied use of materials. Blank Facades (5). Building facades shall not present a blank facade to view from public rights-of-way, common parking areas, or residential properties. Such facades may be broken by windows, trellises, columns, variations in plane, or other devices that add variation and interest to the facade. Pedestrian Environment (6). All buildings fronting on streets shall provide overhead ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ A. MCC CONTINUED.... OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS (a) Parking shall meet the standards of Chapter 20.48 BMC and (b) Parking site design shall meet the following: (1) Access to parking shall be provided from an alley if available; and (2) At least eighty percent (80%) of parking spaces shall be located to the rear of a building away from the primary pedestrian access. LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS Shall meet the standards of BMC Chapter 20.50.050(C) Centers landscaping. SIGN STANDARDS Signs shall meet the standards of Chapter 20.52 BMC. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. MANETTE TRANSITIONAL RESIDENTIAL (MTR) INTENT & PURPOSE The intent of the Manette Transitional Residential (MTR) zone is to implement the vision for this area established by the Manette Sub-Area Plan principles and goals. The area designated as MTR is expected to accommodate new growth that will support the neighborhood center. It is the intent of these regulations to work in conjunction with the city’s zoning code and other development regulations contained within the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC). If provisions of this plan conÀ ict with provisions elsewhere in the BMC, the provisions of this plan will apply. When it is unclear which regulations apply, then the presumption will be that the regulations of this chapter take precedence, with the ultimate determination to be made by the Director. PERMITTED USESACCESSORY USES The following uses are permitted:The following accessory uses may be permitted when found in connection with a principal use: (a) Bed and breakfast; (a) Attached or detached accessory dwelling unit (b) Co-location of wireless per BMC 20.46.010; telecommunications facilities per BMC 20.46.140;(b) Detached garage, carport, and parking facilities associated with the primary use of the property; (c) Day care facilities (c) Home occupation per BMC 20.46.030; (d) Education, schools (K-12), and day care facilities of twelve (12) or fewer (d) Playhouses, patios, cabanas, porches, gazebos, students;swimming pools and incidental permanently constructed household storage buildings; (e) “Live-work units” with upstairs living and downstairs work unit;(e) Other necessary and customary uses determined by the Director to be appropriate, incidental and (f) Parks, playgrounds and open space; subordinate. (g) Residential uses of the following type: (1) Group residential facility – Class I (2) Nursing convalescent home (3) Senior housing complex (4) Single unit structure, attached or detached (5) Townhouses (6) Zero lot line development; (h) Worship and religious facilities of ¿ fteen thousand (15,000) square feet grossÀ oor area or less ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. MTR CONTINUED.... DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Maximum building height (a): Thirty-¿ ve (35) feet. Height Measurement: (h) The height of a Front yard setback (b): Minimum front yard setback building or structure shall be measured as shall be ten (10) feet. the distance from the average ¿ nal grade to the highest point of the structure. Exceptions: Side yard setback (c): Minimum side yard setback penthouse for elevators, ¿ rewalls, chimneys, shall be ¿ ve (5) feet. andÀ agpoles may exceed maximum height Rear yard setback (d): Minimum rear yard setback limits. None of these exceptions to the height shall be ten (10) feet. regulations shall be used for advertising of Maximum development coverage: (e) Seventy- any kind. ¿ ve (75) percent. Accessory Structures (f). The following standards shall apply to all accessory structures, such as but not limited to gazebos, cabanas, garages, carports, and shops, excluding accessory dwelling units per BMC 20.46.010: (1) The maximum area for all accessory structures shall be eighty (80) percent of the principal use ALLOWABLE DENSITY not to exceed one thousand two hundred (1,200) Minimum Density (a). The minimum square feet. required density is ¿ ve (5) dwellings per (2) Setbacks of detached accessory structures acre. are pursuant to BMC 20.44.060. Maximum Density. (b) The maximum ) Design Requirements for Detached Garages, (g allowed density is ¿ fteen (15) dwellings per Storage Buildings and Shops: acre. (1) Structures shall be designed so that the appearance of the building remains that of the OFF-STREET PARKING principal unit’s character including the following: REQUIREMENTS (i) Constructed of similar materials as the Off-street parking shall be provided in principal unit; accordance with the requirements set forth (ii) A roof of equal or greater pitch as the in Chapter 20.48 BMC. principal unit; LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS (iii) A height no more than twenty-¿ ve (25) percent greater than the principal unit not to Shall meet the standards of BMC Chapter exceed thirty-¿ ve (35) feet. 20.50.050(C) Centers landscaping. (2) Vehicle Entrance Setbacks: When the vehicle entrance faces the street, the structure shall have a front yard setback of at least ¿ fteen (15) feet, except as provided in BMC 20.44.020 (Traditional Front Yard Setbacks). ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ B. MTR CONTINUED.... SIGN STANDARDS Signs shall meet the standards of Chapter 20.52 BMC and the following: Freestanding Signs (a) Sign Area (1). The maximum area of freestanding sign shall be limited to ¿ fty (50) square feet. Number of Signs (2). Only one (1) freestanding sign is allowed per each street frontage. Height (3). The height of a freestanding sign shall not exceed six feet. Building Signs (b) Sign Area (1). Signs attached to a building may have an aggregated area that shall not exceed one (1) square foot for each one (1) lineal foot of building façade width. Maximum Sign Size (2). The aggregate area of all building signs, projecting signs, and other signs attached to buildings shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet. Number of Signs (3). The number of signs is limited to one (1) sign per street frontage per business. Illumination (c). (1) When sign is located adjacent to the low density residential zone, the sign shall not be illuminated between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (2) Signs may be illuminated directly, indirectly, or internally, providing the lighting is directed away from other land uses, and away from on-coming traf¿ c. (3) Moving, À ashing, or animated signs are prohibited. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ C. MANETTE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-10) INTENT & PURPOSE Inclusion of an area designated Low Density Residential (R-10) within the Manette sub-area plan was considered an important aspect of the plan. The R-10 area is closely related to the core yet contains a cohesive neighborhood that the community felt was not appropriate for additional density or commercial development. The area was included in the plan boundary for the purpose of analyzing traf¿ c À ow and consideration of overall street improvements only. Therefore it is not anticipated that this plan will regulate this residential area any differently than the City’s currently adopted zoning regulations DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS All development regulations are pursuant to BMC Chapter 20.60, Low Density Residential (R-10) ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ROADWAY EXPECTATIONS The street standards section of the sub-area plan describes the community expectations within the streetscapes of Manette. The map on the left facing page depicts the commu- nity’s vision for the improvements needed to make this neighborhood center more pedestrian friendly. Details of each street designation are contained within the following pages. EXISTING CONDITIONS Manette currently experiences a high volume tran- siting the bridge through East 11th Street. Residents have expressed the desire for right-of-way improve- ments that will calm the traf¿ c and ease pedestrian movement throughout the neighborhood. Current right-of-way widths within the commercial core vary from 54 feet to 60 feet. These widths are consistent for a neighborhood center and are suf¿ - cient for the improvements envisioned for the plan. Right-of-way widths for the neighborhood streets average 40 feet. The center’s current amenities include 5-foot side- walks and parallel parking throughout the neighbor- hood. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ COMMUNITY BOULEVARD DESIRED AMENITIES INTENT & PURPOSE As the primary circulation streets within Manette, These streets serve the core commercial the Community Boulevard should include many area and are intended to be the pedestrian amenities to make it a desirable streetscape, such primary streets, yet they are also the as: primary streets that move vehicles through Decorative pedestrian-scale streetlights placed the area. The streets should be designed û at 25’ intervals. in a manner encouraging safe pedestrian Street trees planted within the sidewalk area, movement, ease of vehicular use, and also û while maintaining ADA accessibility. serve the local businesses with additional Hanging baskets. parking. û Pavers or decorative paving. û Planters. û Street furnishings. DESIGN STANDARD û Information kiosks & way¿ nding signage. The existing right-of-way width for these û Public art. streets is 60 feet. Improvements should be û Utilization of sidewalks by local businesses for made to re-con¿ gure on-street parking from û uses such as outdoor dining. parallel to angled spaces and the sidewalk Use of low impact development (LID) width should be increased to at least 10 û techniques such as pervious pavement. feet. SEE FIGURE 1 D. STREET STANDARDS ~ MULTIMODAL STREETS INTENT & PURPOSEDESIRED AMENITIES These streets serve Manette’s core The multimodal streets serve the businesses within commercial area and they are intended to Manette and are utilized by pedestrians, non- be pedestrian friendly, they are narrower motorized users, and automobiles. They should than the “Community Boulevard” and serve include many amenities to make it a desirable a lower traf¿ c volume. streetscape, such as: Decorative pedestrian-scale streetlights placed û DESIGN STANDARD at 25’ intervals. The existing right-of-way width for these Street trees planted at the back of sidewalk if û streets is 54 feet. The desired sidewalk ample width is not available to accommodate width is at least 5 feet. Some of these streets ADA accessibility. have the opportunity to be utilized as part of Hanging baskets. û the “Non-Motorized-Transportation” network Pavers or decorative paving. û and therefore “sharrows” (which are “shared Planters. û right-of-ways” between bikes and cars) Street furnishings. û should be encouraged where appropriate. Sharrows (bike lanes). û Use of low impact development (LID) û techniques such as pervious pavement. SEE FIGURES 2-5 ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS INTENT & PURPOSEDESIRED AMENITIES Neighborhood streets serve the residential areas As these streets serve the residential areas surrounding the commercial core of Manette. These of Manette, improvements should not give are low-speed streets not intended to serve large the impression of a major commercial area. volumes of traf¿ c. The design goal for these streets Encouraged are improvements such as: is to allow pedestrians to feel comfortable walking Street trees planted at the back of û and using the streetscape.sidewalk. Use of low impact development û DESIGN STANDARD (LID) techniques such as pervious The existing right-of-way width for these streets is pavement. 40 feet. The desired sidewalk width is at least 5 SEE FIGURE 6 feet. D. STREET STANDARDS ~ TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES Some areas of Manette may require the use of traf¿ c calming features. The intent of this section is to identify the measures that are supported by the neighborhood. Traf¿ c calming measures should be utilized where Neighborhood Streets connect with Multimodal Streets and the Community Boulevard. Corner bulb-out; either a partial or full extension of the line of the curb into the vehicular right of way or parking lane. The bulb-out can be placed on one side or both sides of the intersection. This feature is primarily used to reduce the width of street at pedestrian crossings and to improve the visibility between pedestrians and drivers. Bulb-outs should be implemented generously on pedestrian primary streets such as E 11th Street, and Harkins. Traf¿ c calming landscape islands in the middle of neighborhood intersections to reduce traf¿ c speeds. A mid-block A crossing combined with a bulb-out can reduce jaywalking activities and pedestrian contact with traf¿ c by w having a narrowed street width at the crossing. They also slow oncoming traf¿ c through the crosswalk, increasing pedestrian and driver visibility. ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 1 COMMUNITY BOULEVARD ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 2 MULTIMODAL STREETS NOTE: OPTION A - ANGLE PARKING, NO SHARROW ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 3 MULTIMODAL STREETS NOTE: OPTION B - PARALLEL PARKING WITH SHARROW ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 4 MULTIMODAL STREETS NOTE: OPTION C - ONE-WAY, SHARROW, ANGLE PARKING ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 5 MULTIMODAL STREETS NOTE: OPTION D - PARALLEL PARKING & VARIED SIDEWALK WIDTH ïÛÎ×ÈÈ×éÇÚûÊ×ÛìÐÛÎ¾ìÐÛÎÎÓÎÕùÍÏÏÓÉÉÓÍÎô×ÛÊÓÎÕøÊÛÖÈ¾ûÌÊÓÐ D. STREET STANDARDS ~ FIG. 6 NEIGHBORHOOD STS NOTE: IF ADDITIONAL ROW IS AVAILABLE, PREFER PARKING BOTH SIDES ìÊÍØÇÙ×ØúÃùÓÈÃÍÖúÊ×Ï×ÊÈÍÎø×ÌÛÊÈÏ×ÎÈÍÖùÍÏÏÇÎÓÈÃø×Æ×ÐÍÌÏ×ÎÈ éÓÄÈÔéÈÊ××ÈéÇÓÈ× úÊ×Ï×ÊÈÍÎåÛÉÔÓÎÕÈÍÎ ¾