Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/18/2014 PACKET(DRAFT) AGENDA Regular Meeting –Bremerton Planning Commission (Subject to PC approval) February 18, 2014 5:30 P.M. th 345–6Street Meeting Chamber –First Floor I.CALL TO ORDER II.ROLL CALL (quorum present) III. ELECTION OF OFFICER–Vice Chair IV.APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA V.APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January21, 2014meeting. o VI.PUBLIC MEETING A. Call to the Public: Public comments on any item not on tonight’s agenda B.Public Hearing 1. Public Hearing onZoning Code Amendments C. Public Workshop 1. Discussion of the Wheaton/Riddell District Center VII.BUSINESS MEETING A. Chair Report: B. Director Report: Andrea Spencer. C.Old Business:Vote on By-Law Changes D.New Business: VIII.ADJOURNMENT: The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is March18, 2014 Planning Commission meeting packets are available on-line at www.ci.bremerton.wa.us MEMORANDUM CITY OF BREMERTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Andrea L. Spencer, AICP SUBJECT: Change in Membership & Voting for Vice-Chair DATE: February 11, 2014 Following the January meeting I had the opportunity to hire a new staffmember, and it is my pleasure to share with you that I was able to hire Kelli Lambert as the city’s newest planner.The good news is that Kelli will still be an integral part of the Planning Commission’s work so you don’t have to say goodbye, however she is no longer eligible to serve as a Commission member. As a result, the Commission will need to appointa new vice-chair at the February meeting. The Mayor has chosen to appoint Nick Wofford, past Councilmember, to serve out the remainder of Kelli’s term. Please join me in giving Nick a warm welcome at the February meeting. DRAFT Subject to February 18, 2014Approval CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULARMEETING January 21, 2014 CALL TO ORDER: Commissioner Tiftcalled theregularmeeting of the Bremerton Planning Commission to order at 5:35p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioners PresentStaff Present Chair TiftAndrea Spencer,Director,Department of Community Development Vice Chair LambertNicole Floyd, SeniorPlanner, Department of Community Development Commissioner AlbrightGarrett Jackson, Planner, Department of Community Development Commissioner Dinkuhn Commissioner Simpson Commissioner Strube Commissioners Absent CommissionerJose (excused) Quorum Certified ELECTION OF OFFICERS COMMISSIONER DINKUHN NOMINATED COMMISSIONER TIFT TO SERVE AS CHAIR OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 2014. COMMISSIONER ALBRIGHT SECONDED THE NOMINATION. THERE WERE NO OTHER NOMINATIONS, AND THE NOMINATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED. COMMISSIONERTIFT NOMINATED COMMISSIONER LAMBERTTO SERVE AS VICE CHAIR OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR 2014. COMMISSIONER SIMPSONSECONDED THE NOMINATION. THERE WERE NO OTHER NOMINATIONS, AND THENOMINATION WAS UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COMMISSIONER SIMPSONMOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER DINKUHNSECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF MINUTES COMMISSIONER ALBRIGHTMOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 2013AS PRESENTED. VICE CHAIR LAMBERTSECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC MEETING Call to the Public(public comments on any item not on the agenda) Chair Tift asked if there were any comments from citizens. Seeing none, he closed the publicportion of the meeting. Workshop: Zoning Code Amendments Ms. Floyd explained that, each year, staff presents a list of potential zoning code amendments to the Commission. In addition to the staff-generated amendments, a property owner has requested anamendment. She explained that the purpose of the workshop is for the Commission to review the proposed changes and provide guidance that will enable staff to draft zoning code languagefor a future public hearing. The Commission and staffreviewed the proposed zoning code amendments as follows: Nonconforming Signs BMC (20.52.180).Mr. Jackson explained that the purpose of the sign code is to ensure that on-premise business signs are of a size, number, quantity and style to provide identification ofbusinesses while contributing a positive visual character to the community. He provided a picture to illustrate the existing conditions on Wheaton Way, as well as an example from Gig Harbor that illustrates the intent of the 2004Comprehensive Plan that called for moldingthe streetscapeto limit visual sign clutter. Commissioner Simpson pointed out that apart from the pole signs on Wheaton Way, the biggest eyesore is the utility poles. She asked if the Comprehensive Plan calls for replacing the existing poles with underground utilities. Ms. Spencer said underground utilities are called out as a goal in the Comprehensive Plan, and the goal would be implemented as part of future right-of-way or streetscape improvements. She referred to the Aurora Corridor Project in Shoreline, where they have implemented a concept very similar to the vision called out in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. She acknowledged that amending the sign code would not resolve all the issues, but it would be a move in the right direction. Chair Tift noted that the City’s street identification signs in downtown Bremerton are large and lit. He asked if this Ms. Spencer would be thestandard for the entire City. answered that the intent is to implement this same sign standard citywide. However, she acknowledged that replacing the existing signs would be costlyand take some time. Mr. Jackson provided a pictureto illustrate the size and scale of some the existing nonconforming signs, which are out of proportion with the surrounding streetscape. He also provided pictures of signs that are more manageable and safe yet sill recognize a business’s need to advertise. He explained that the 2005 Zoning Codecalls for the removal of nonconforming signs within 10 years, i.e. by 2015, and he invited the Commission to share their thoughts on whether or not the City should push forward with this goal. He noted thatwhilethere is legal precedent to support cities mandating sign removal, it is difficult. Commissioner Simpson Ms. Floyd asked how many existing signs are nonconforming. answeredthat the City does not have an exact number, but there are a lot. She noted that signs taller than 8 feet are currently prohibited on Wheaton Way and Kitsap Way. She summarized that while businesses like to have large pole signs, they are not what the community was looking for as part of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Dinkuhn pointed out that several businesses on Wheaton Way have closed. She suggested that a great place to start would be for the City to require these property owners to remove existing nonconforming pole Ms. Spencer signs. said that, to date, the City’s approach has been to allow property owners to replace a sign’s Commissioner Albright face, as long as the sign is still in useablecondition. asked if the City allows permits for Ms. Floyd new pole signs. said the City does not allow new pole signs in the zones where they are prohibited. However, they are still allowed in some commercial zones. th Commissioner Tift for six months so the structure noted that McDonalds on Wheaton Way is closing January 27 Ms. Floyd can be rebuilt. He asked if the existing pole sign would be allowed to stay. answered affirmatively and Draft Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes 26 January 21, 2014 ~ Page of explained that, as per the current code,the City would require that the remaining pole signs be removed in 2015. The purpose of tonight’s discussion is to ascertain support for moving forward with implementation of this requirement. If that is no longer the intent, the code should be changed accordingly. Vice ChairLambert asked if it would be possible to revise the code to say that if a business closes, the new Ms. Spencer business would not be allowed to have a pole sign. agreed that would be a far more gentle approach toward eliminatingthe nonconforming signs. However, she questioned if it would be fair to require property owners to remove nonconforming signs when they lease space to different tenants. She alsocommented that this approach would be very difficult to track. A more logical trigger point would be if a property has not been in use for more than a year, similar to the City’s approach to nonconformities. Commissioner Dinkuhn Ms. Floyd asked if signage could be tied to development permits. answered that one option would be to tie sign conformity to site improvementsand/or property that remains vacant for more than a Commissioner Albright year. recalled that in previous discussions, the Commission talked about tying the zoning requirements to a percentage of asite improvement. For example, if an entire building is redeveloped, the applicant Ms. Floyd should be required to comply with all zoning standards, including signage. said that, currently, the new sign standards would only apply when significant changes are made to the sign structure. However, the code could be changed to tie sign code compliance to site and building improvements. Political Signs (BMC 20.52.085). Ms. Floyd pointed out that every jurisdiction handles political signsdifferently. Staff is proposing that this section be reorganized so it is easier for citizens to understand. In addition, the section Commissioner Strube could be amended to make the requirements and limitations clearer. said that although he did not view the issue as a significant problem during the recent election, having clear information regarding the Commissioner Simpson requirements for political signs would be beneficial. suggested that the code requirements should be simple and concise. However, she noted that, oftentimes, volunteers put up the signs and the locations are sometimes beyond a candidate’s control. Special Purpose Signs (BMC 20.52.130). Mr. Jackson explained that, currently, the code lacks a definition for “special purpose signs,” which are commercial signs located in residential areas. Staff believes that providing a Commissioner Albright definition within the introductory paragraph of this section would be helpful. asked if the Ms. Floyd code limits howfast the message on a special purpose sign could move across the display. answered Commissioner Strube affirmatively but said the requirement is difficult to enforce. asked if the code places Ms. Spencer restrictions on LED technology. answered that there are no prohibitions against LED signs with stagnant images, but there are limitations on signs that flash and/or move. The Commission discussed whether or not daycares and other small businesses in residential zones should be Ms. Floyd allowed to have “special purpose signs.” advised that there are specific sign limitations for home-based businesses. Larger businesses that are allowed by conditional use permit could have larger signs, but a public process would be involved. Sandwich Boards and Portable Signs (BMC 20.2.160 and 20.52.170). Mr. Jackson explained that the requirements and restrictions for sandwich board and portable signs are found in two separate sections of the sign code. Staff believes that readers would benefit greatlyif the two were combined into one section. He noted that the two sections are nearly identical, except theyvary in terms of distance the sign can be from the door. The Commission generally agreedthat the two sections should be combined. They expressed that the City should Ms. Floyd support business owners’ efforts to attract customers whenever possible. pointed out that because sandwich board signs are easy to move, it is difficult to get property owners to consistently comply with the requirements. The Commission recalled the presentation by Roger Brooks, who suggested that blade signs are effective ways to Ms. Floyd advertise businesses. commented that the City’s current code allows for blade signs, but it does not Commissioner Dinkuhn require them. suggested that making business owners aware that blade signs are allowed Vice ChairLambert might encourage their use.expressed concern that the nylon signs that are becoming more Draft Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes 36 January 21, 2014 ~ Page of Ms. Floyd popular tend to block visibility. advised that this type of sign would fall under the category of “moving, flashing or animated” and would be prohibited. Mobile Homes (BMC 19). Mr. Jackson advised that mobile homes are prohibited in the City of Bremerton. He explained that mobile homes have not been constructed since 1976 due to concerns over safety and poor construction. Manufactured homes are the modern-day successor to mobile homes, and standards for this use are established in BMC 20.46.040. Staff recommends that BMC 19 be deleted from the code, and the Commission concurred. Multi-Family in the Institutional Zone (BMC 20.98). Ms. Floyd advised that the City received an application from a private property owner to amend the zoning code to add multi-family as a permitted use within the Institutional Zone. She provided a map and pointed out that although the Comprehensive Plan calls out Harrison Hospital and Olympic College each as anEmployment Center District, Harrison Hospital has both Institutional and Employment Center Zoning. Olympic College has only Institutional Zoning. She explained that the Employment Center Zone was designed to accommodate the kinds of growth that might happen around the two institutions. However, both zones are similar and allow for almost the same uses. She provided a chart to illustrate how the uses Ms. Spencer allowed in each of the two zones are very similar. suggestedthat ratherthan eliminateone of the zoning categories, which would require a subsequent rezone,staff is proposing to make the uses allowed in the two zones match and be consistent with the definitions in the zoning code. Vice ChairLambert questioned if problems could arise in the future if the City receives an applicationto rezone Mr. another property to Institutional. Would there be a reason why multi-family uses should not be allowed. Jackson explained that an Institutional Zoneallowsfor colleges and hospitals, and it is not likely that these types of uses would expand in the future. It was discussed that allowing for multi-family development would accommodate students who attend the college. Electric Vehicle Infrastructure. Ms. Floyd explained that in 2009 there was an incentive-drivenidea that people would be able to drive an electric vehicle (EV) from Baja, California, to British Columbia. To support the concept, the Washington State Legislature passed SSHB 1481, which mandates that affected jurisdictions plan for EV infrastructure and modify zoning regulations to allow the infrastructure to be built. She advised that, currently, the City allows for EVinfrastructure, but the codedoes not specifically address EV charging or battery exchange facilities. Ms. Spencer summarized thatstaff is recommending a simple amendment with no regulatory burden for LEVEL 1 and 2 Systems that are accessory uses to allowed uses. However, there should be more specific requirements for Level 3 Systems that could have amore significant impact to neighborhoods. The Commission agreed it is Commissioner Strube important to have simple regulations in placefor the future.cautioned that the code should Ms. include standards that protect neighborhoods from alarm noises when the stations are not working properly. Floyd clarified that the proposed amendments would apply to EV stations on private property not public rights-of- way, and the noise ordinance could be used to address concerns. Taxi Cabs as Home Occupations (BMC 20.46.030). Ms. Floyd recalled that staff proposed potential amendments to the “home occupation” section of the code in 2012. However, the issue was not chosen as a priority for the annual zoning code amendment docket. The Police Department has requested that the issue be readdressed as it pertains to taxi cab businesses because of the upswing of drug-related activities affiliated with the use. In addition to police concerns, taxi cab businesses createneighborhood impacts. For example, the demand for taxi service is often very heavy in the late night hours, and residents often find that their quiet residential streets have become very active and noisy in the late night hours. In addition, neighborhoods with minimal parking often complain that the taxis take up precious parking spaces that are intended for residential uses. Although the home occupation code requires an additional on-site parking space to accommodate the business, it is difficult to determine or regulate the number of cars each residence has. For these reasons and others, staff is recommending this item be included on the docket as a potential zoning code amendment. Draft Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes 46 January 21, 2014 ~ Page of Ms. Spencer pointed out that approximately 70% of the taxi cab companies located in Bremerton are operated out of private residences. The Police Department presented its concerns to the City Council, and the Council asked staff Commissioner Simpson to work on the issue. asked staff to provide a map of the locations of the current taxi cab businesses. She also requested information from the Police Department to document the increase in crime and the Ms. Spencer number of taxi cab businesses involved with illegal drug operations. agreed to seek the requested information, but the Commission should keep in mind that the Police Department may not have written statistics that Commissioner Simpson totally satisfy the answer. also requested copies of the complaints the City has received regarding the use. Commissioner Strube expressed his belief that amending the zoning code would only partially address the issue. Perhaps a condition could be attached to the business license limiting the number of complaints a taxi cab business Ms. Spencer could receive without resolution or action. agreed thatcrimeissues cannot be addressed by zoning code changes, but the amendments could address the other impacts to neighborhoods. In addition, thePolice Department has askedthat taxi businesses be required to completea rigorous licensing process, background checks, etc. and those code changes are being worked on bythe City’s Tax and Licensing Division. Commissioner Albright suggested that the first step is to identify the number of cars a taxi cab business should be allowed to operate from a residential home. She questioned if it would even be possible to regulate the time of Ms. Spencer operation, since that is part of the nature of the business. suggested the Commission discuss whether a taxi cab service is an appropriate home-based business. If the answer is yes, they need to establish regulations to Commissioner Dinkuhn minimize the impacts. suggested that perhaps the use is appropriate for some residential areas but not others.For example, the use may be more appropriate in a rural setting as opposed to aneighborhood Commissioner Albright with small lots and very little space for on-site parking. suggested it mightbe appropriate to review all types of home-based businesses that are currently allowed in residential areas, particularly those that involve additional vehicles. Ms. Floyd summarized that the Commission is interested in pursuing code amendments relatedto taxi-cab businesses in residential neighborhoods, but they would like more data on the number of complaints and sample code provisions from other jurisdictions. Ideas include limiting the hours of operation, requiring on-site parking, and/or limiting the number of trips per day. The Commission specifically requested a map to illustrate where the Ms. Floyd existing taxi cab businesses are located. shared a current situation and stressed the importance of having Commissioner Strube clear regulations for the City to implement and enforce. recalled that the City of Seattle heavily regulates taxi cab businesses, but they do not regulate similar companies that operatevia the internet. He cautioned against singling out just the traditional taxi cab businesses. The zoning regulations should be all- inclusive. Chris Campana, Bremerton, said he owns a large property that is contiguous to Mr. Cadwell’s (applicant) property, as well as property across the street. He said he was present to voice support forthe proposed amendment to allow multi-family development in the Institutional Zone (BMC 20.98). In discussions he has had with representatives from the college and hospital, they have indicated support for multi-family housing in the Institutional Zone. While the change would result in a personal financial gain for him, it would also support the City’s plans for revitalization of the area. He commented that housing is needed to provide the necessary population to support the retail and service businesseslocated in the area, as well as living accommodations for students. He specifically commended staff for their support of small-time developers over the past several years. The proposed change would offer additional use of the property and open the door to other development. Rick Cadwell, Bremerton, said he owns property in the Institutional Zone and he is the applicant for the proposed amendment to allow multi-family development. He said it appears that the Comprehensive Plan goal of having a varietyof housing types at various levels of affordability was neverfullytransferred to the zoning code. Providing housing options would allow people to walk to work and school and fewer parking areas would be needed. Related to the home occupation discussion, he said he participated on the Poulsbo Zoning Committee, which dealt with home occupation uses by allowing just two commercial vehicles. They did not limit the hours of operation. Commissioner Dinkuhn commented that having a bridge-to-bridge loop is important, and accommodating increased populationdensitywould support this concept. The Commission had a brief discussion with Mr. Campana about the reasons Draft Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes 56 January 21, 2014 ~ Page of why redevelopment of properties within the Institutional and Employment Center Zones has not occurred in recent years. Mr. Campana said that while the poor economy had a significant impact, there is no housing in the area to support new development. BUSINESS MEETING Chair Report Chair Tift thanked the Commission for electing him as chair. Director Report Ms. Spencer announced that the Gorst Subarea Plan was unanimously adopted by the City Council. The Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) will be presented to the Council as a separate item in February. She also announced that the Department of Ecology adopted the City’s Shoreline Master Program. Old Business There was no old business to come before the Commission. New Business Chair Tift Ms. Spencer asked if any large projects wouldcome before the Commission in 2014. answered that the City will be starting itswork on the Comprehensive Plan Update. Staff will begin working on the Buildable Lands Report and the Land Capacity Analysis in 2014. Once this work is completed, the City will begin debating population allocations with the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council (KRCC). Ms. Spencer reviewed the typographical errors and proposed changes to theCommission’s Bylaws. She particularly referred to Item II.C.3.b, and explained that because the Council no longer has a planning committee, staff is recommending that this vice chair duty be deleted. Staff is also recommending that an additional chair duty be added to Item II.C.2 “to represent the Planning Commission’s recommendationsto City Council, if necessary.” In addition to the changesproposed by staff, the Commission askedthat the following changes be made: Item III.B.2 should be changed by adding thewords “or email” after “mail.” The word “even” should be changed to “event” in Item VIII.8. Puta space between Items VIII.1 and VIII.2. Item II.B.1 should be changed to indicate that election of officers would take place in November and not December. The Commission indicated support for the proposed changes, and Ms. Spencer agreed to prepare an updated draft of the th Commission’s Bylaws for final approval on February 18. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:43p.m. Respectively Submitted by: ____________________________________________________________ Andrea L Spencer, AICPRichard L. Tift, Chair Executive SecretaryPlanning Commission Draft Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes 66 January 21, 2014 ~ Page of Commission Hearing Date: February 18, 2014 Agenda Item: VI B CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing on proposed Title 20 amendments & Title 19 Repeal DEPARTMENT: Community Development (DCD) PRESENTED BY: Garrett Jackson, Planner I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: st The Planning Commission held a workshop on January 21, 2014 to discuss a wide variety of potential Zoning Code Amendments. Based on the Planning Commissions input, Staff is bringing forward four topics for this Hearing. The proposed amendments are summarized as follows: Repeal of Title 19 regulating mobile homes as this this section is in conflict with other code sections and is outdated. Compliance with State code relating to electric vehicle charging stations. Updating sign code standards to eliminate sign amortization, update nonconformities, and improve consistency of sign requirements across zoning districts. Revising both Institutional and Employment Center zoning to ensure better consistency between the two zones. The January workshop also included home occupations for taxi cabs, as a possible amendment. This topic, however, will not be included in the Hearing. Business Licensing is preparing amendments to their licensing standards regarding this matter, and the City Attorney recommends postponing action on this matter until the effects of the new licensing standards can be evaluated. Ideally, the new licensing standards may rectify the outstanding issues relating to these home occupations. The following staff report presents a summary of the four proposed amendments in more detail and includes information about Staff’s research and analysis. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment I: Proposed text amendments in legislative format Attachment II: Planning Commission Findings and Conclusions STAFF RECOMMENDED MOTION : Move to recommend the City Council adopt the text amendments to BMC Title 20 and repeal of Title 19, as detailed in Attachment I, and based upon the staff report and the Findings and Conclusions presented in Attachment II. 1 STAFF REPORT AND ANALYSIS TITLE 19: MOBILE HOMES As discussed in the Planning Commission workshop, Title 19 is inconsistent with the provisions contained in Title 20. The Planning Commission directed Staff to prepare documents for the repeal of Title 19, as provided in Attachment I. ELECTRIC VEHICLE INFRASTRUCTURE As discussed in the Planning Commission workshop, the City of Bremerton does not specifically address electric vehicle charging, or battery exchange facilities, in the regulatory code. State law SSHB 1481, requires that local government’s development regulations allowing electric vehicle infrastructure in all zones except those zoned for residential, resource, or critical areas. The Planning Commission has directed Staff to draft amendments in order to satisfy SSHB 1481, as seen in Attachment I. Accordingly, Staff has prepared amendments to BMC 20.48 Off-street Parking Requirements and BMC 20.42 Definitions, allowing for future electric vehicle infrastructure. The proposed amendments provide for the following: More intense uses, such as rapid charging stations, are limited to areas where gas stations are permitted. Ensure electric vehicle charging stations are not a stand-alone use, by regulating them as an accessory use. Providing several definitions to ensure clear understanding of the different components associated with electric vehicle changing stations. SIGN CODE Several sections of the code have been identified for minor modification to increase readability. Other sections have been reviewed for modification to better implement the vision in the Comprehensive Plan such as the nonconforming sign provisions. Based on the recommendation of the Planning Commission, Staff has drafted the following sign code amendments: 1. Special Purpose Sign Regulations – Combine the special purpose sign code section with the residential sign standards. Special purpose signs are typically commercial signs within the Low Density Residential zone. These signs are associated with existing businesses, schools and parks. Staff determined that the code requirements for signs related to apartment complexes were very similar to those assigned to special purposes signs. For that reason, Staff recommends removing the special purpose sign section and combining it with the residential sign section. 2. Sandwich Board Signs – Sandwich board signs are currently regulated by two separate code sections, one for Downtown and the other regulates sandwich boards and portable 2 signs within the remainder of the City. It is unclear why there are two sections, as the differences between them appear to be nominal. Staff presented the Commission with the two sets of regulations, at the Commission workshop, seeking direction to the merits of keeping these regulatory sections separate. The Planning Commission has directed Staff to draft amendments combining the regulation of sandwich boards into one section, as seen in Attachment I. The proposed amendments provide for the following: Change the section title to ‘Portable Signs’, as the sections are combined the resulting code must address all portable signs, not just sandwich boards. Replace the term sandwich board throughout the section with the term portable sign as sandwich boards are defined as a type of portable sign. Delete the definition of sandwich board as it is not necessary and duplicative . The definition of portable signs adequately addresses all portable signs, including sandwich boards. 3. Nonconforming Signs – As discussed in the Planning Commission Workshop, the sign code does not provide an equitable means toward bringing nonconforming signs into conformity with the code requirements because the code requires nonconforming signs to be removed by 2015. The proposed amendments replace the amortization program with updated nonconformity provisions that separate nonconforming signs by two distinctions: off-premise signs and on-premise signs. The proposed revisions trigger nonconforming signs removal when modifications are proposed by the applicant to the sign rather than all at once. The Comprehensive Plan identifies off-premise signs as a priority for removal, and the proposed amendments reflect this precedence. Amendments aim to achieve a similar goal, of eventual compliance with the visions within the Comprehensive Plan, by triggering compliance as follows: a. Off-premise signs: Any alterations made to structural elements of the sign will result in the loss of the signs nonconforming status. In no case shall the nonconforming sign be allowed to expanded or enlarged. b. On-premise signs: If alterations to the structural elements of the sign exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the replacement cost of the signs, the sign shall lose its nonconforming status. A freestanding signs whose cabinet housing is removed or replaced shall lose its nonconforming status. If site improvements exceed seventy-five (75) percent of the assessed improvement value of the site, or improvements exceed one hundred thousand (100,000) dollars, nonconforming signs shall lose their legal nonconforming status. If the sign has not advertised an existing business on the subject site for one (1) year or more, the sign shall lose its nonconforming status. 3 Other jurisdictions such as the City of Olympia have had successes with similar provisions, rather than utilizing amortization to achieve compliance with the sign code. The intent of these revisions is to provide a more reasonable alternative to wholesale sign removal. MULTI-FAMILY IN THE INSTITUTIONAL ZONE The City has received an application for a Zoning Code amendment to add multi-family as a permitted use within the Institutional Zone. Based off of the recommendations of the Planning Commission, Staff has drafted amendments adding multi-family to allowed uses in the Institutional zone and updated the permitted use lists for both districts to ensure consistent terms used in the definitions section of Title 20 Institutional zoning. The following provides a chart of the changes made: Employment Center (20.92) Institutional (20.98) 1) Group Residential Facility – Class I 1) Group Residential Facility – Class I Multi-unit structure 2) Nursing convalescent home 2) Nursing convalescent home; Nursing convalescent home 3) Senior Housing Complex 3) Senior housing complex; Senior housing complex 4) Single-unit dwelling unit structure, 4) Single-unit structure, attached or attached or detached; detached; Single-unit structure, attached or 5) Single unit dwelling unit, attached detachedMulti-unit structure; 5) Multi-unit structure; 6) Townhouses 6) Townhouse; SUMMARY: Staff believes that these revisions reflect the input received by the Planning Commission at the st January 21 workshop, and will better meet the tenants of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed amendments provide more clarity to the code, brings the City into conformity with State law, and ensures a more equitable environment for local businesses and citizens of Bremerton. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Planning Commission review the materials provided, conduct a Public Hearing, consider testimony and move to recommend the proposed amendments to the City Council for adoption. 4 Attachment I PROPOSED ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS Mobile Homes: Eliminate Title 19.Section is outdated, inaccurate, and inconsistent with existing regulations for manufactured homes: Title 19MOBILEHOMES 19.04.010 UNLAWFUL. It is unlawful, within the limits of the city of Bremerton, for any person to park any mobile home, then used for human habitation, on any street, alley or highway, or other public place, or on any tract of land owned by any person, occupied or unoccupied. (Ord. 2775 §1, 1968). 19.08.010 REGULATIONS GENERALLY -LOCATION. Mobile home parks may be located in any area within the city and shall be arranged and constructed in compliance with the regulations set out in this chapter. (Ord. 2396 §1 (part), 1960). 19.08.020 AREA. Each mobile home park shall contain not less than three acres of land and shall provide a minimum area of two thousand square feet, not less than thirty feet in width, for each trailer, plus additional off-street parking for one automobile. (Ord. 2396 §1(1), 1960). 19.08.030 TRAILER PLACEMENT. Each trailer within said home park shall be set back at least fifty feet from the front street and shall have a ten-foot side clearance from any adjacent street, alley or sidewalk. No trailer shall be placed upon any site at any less distance than ten feet from any other building or trailer. (Ord. 2396 §1(2), 1960). 19.08.040 PLANTING SCREEN. A mobile home park adjacent to or abutting upon an R-l or R-2 area shall provide a ten-foot high minimum planting screen on the sides and rear of said park. (Ord. 2396 §1(3), 1960). 19.08.050 STREETS. All streets within said park shall be paved with a hard surface and shall be not less than thirty feet in width; ingress and egress to said park and streets shall be subject to the approval of the traffic department of the Bremerton police department. (Ord. 2396 §1(4), 1960). 19.08.060 COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER REGULATIONS. Said park shall be adequately lighted and drained and shall be construed in compliance with the building, zoning, sanitary, garbage, plumbing and all other ordinances of the city and requirements for the same shall be subject to the approval of the health department, engineer, building inspector and fire inspector. (Ord. 2396 §1(5), 1960). 19.08.070 PLAT PLAN -PERMIT. Prior to the issuance of any permit, a plat plan in full detail shall be provided so that the different departments of the city and the planning commission may approve them. Such permit shall be issued by the building inspector upon the payment ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡1 Attachment I of a fee of twenty-five dollars after approval by the foregoing city agencies. (Ord. 2396 §1(6),1960). Electric Vehicles: Add language to address Electric Vehicles within the City as required by State Law by adding a section to the parking standards and providing definitions for specific features not previously defined: 20.48.150 ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATIONS. Where parking is providedin association with allowed uses within the associated zone, electric vehicle charging stations are encouraged and shall comply with City Building Code and Washington State Electrical Code (WAC 296.46B). 20.42DEFINITIONS: "Automobileservice and repair" means an establishment primarily engaged in repairing, maintaining, or servicing automobiles,includingelectric vehiclebattery exchange station. “Battery charging station” means an electrical component assembly or cluster of component assemblies designed specifically to charge batteries within electric vehicles, which meet or exceed any standards, codes, and regulations set forth by chapter 19.28 RCW and consistent with rules adopted under RCW 19.27.540. “Battery exchange station” means a fully automated facility that will enable an electric vehicle with a swappable battery to enter a drive lane and exchange the depleted battery with a fully charged battery through a fully automated process, which meets or exceeds any standards, codes, and regulations set forth by chapter 19.27 RCW and consistent with rules adopted under RCW 19.27.540. “Electric vehicle charging station” means a public or private parking space that is served by battery charging station equipment that has as its primary purpose the transfer of electric energy (by conductive or inductive means) to a battery or other energy storage device in an electric vehicle. An electric vehicle charging station equipped with Level 1 or Level 2 charging equipment is permitted outright as an accessory use to any principal use. “Electric vehicle infrastructure” means structures, machinery, and equipment necessary and integral to support an electric vehicle, including battery charging stations, rapid charging stations, and battery exchange stations. "Gas station" means a land use involving the retail sale of gasoline or other motor vehicle fuel or oil,including electric vehicle rapid charging stations. Gas stations include self-service and full-service operations. “Rapid charging station” means an industrial grade electrical outlet that allows for faster recharging of electric vehicle batteries through higher power levels and that meets or exceeds any standards, codes, and regulations set forth by chapter 19.28 RCW and consistent with rules adopted under RCW 19.27.540. ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡2 Attachment I "Transportation facility" means facilities in support of mass transit or multimodal forms of transportation, including transit stations, transit stops, taxicab stands, transportation services, bicycle facilities,electric vehicle battery charging stations, electric vehicle charging station, and similar. Signs The proposal includes modification to several sections of the sign code relating to clarifying meaning of sections, eliminating duplicative language, and modifying the way in which nonconforming signs are regulated. 20.42–Definitions: "Abandoned sign" means any sign, including its structure and other components, which is located on vacant property or an unoccupied building for a period of one (1) yearsix (6) months or more and which, during that time, is not used for legal sign purposes; or which relates to a time, event or purpose which no longer applies; and/or which has been allowed to deteriorate to become a public hazard or eyesore. "Sandwich board sign" means a portable sign constructed of two (2) equal or roughly equal portions, hinged at the top such that when placed on the ground the sign is self- supporting. Sandwich board signs typically form the shape of a letter "A" when opened and resting on the ground. 20.52.050PROHIBITED SIGNS. The following signs are prohibited within the City limits of Bremerton and shall be subject to removal through amortization or other means: (a)Strobe lights or any other flashing, moving or animated features that are visible beyond any property line. Reader-board or message center signs that change copy no more frequently than at two (2) second intervals, and time/temperature signs are exempt from this provision. (b)Pole signs in all zones except the freeway corridor (FC) zone and the industrial (I) zone. (c)Private signs placed within a public right-of-way; except a projecting sign, may be permitted over a sidewalk if a clearance of at least eight (8) feet is maintained between the sidewalk and the bottom of the sign. (d)Any sign that is determined by the City Engineer to be a hazard to public safety due to its design, materials, physical condition, or placement. (e)Signs painted, attached to, or otherwise supported by rock formations, utility poles, trees or other plant materials. (f)Bench signs, when installed within the public right-of-way. When on private property, the size of a bench sign will be counted toward the total allowable sign area. (g)Portable signs within the public right-of-way except portable sandwich board signs per BMC20.52.160and20.52.170. (h)Off-premises signs including billboards. (i)Product signs, other than those at a franchise business identifying the franchise product. (Ord. 4950 §8 (Exh. A) (part), 2005) ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡3 Attachment I 20.52.070SIGN PLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS. (a)All signs, including supporting structures, shall be erected or placed totally within the boundaries of the site and not within any public right-of-way, except for the following: (1)Public authority and other traffic-related signs; (2)Temporary banner signs advertising a public event, which meet City approval; (3)Approved signs overhanging public walkways; and (4)Approved portablesandwich board signs per BMC20.52.160and20.52.170. (b)A vision clearance setback shall be maintained of at least fifteen(15) feet from the edge of all private and public roadways, alleys and driveway intersections. (c)A vision clearance setback shall be maintained of at least ten (10) feet from the edge of existing or planned roadways. Signs may be allowed within the clear-vision setback if: (1)A pole sign is allowed by the zone; (2)The top of the sign is three (3) feet or less above the grade; (3)The bottom of the sign is eight (8) feet or greater above the grade; or (4)The posts and support structure have a diameter no greater than twelve (12) inches within this area. (d)A pedestrian clearance is required for any projecting sign (8) feet above grade or sidewalk as measured to the bottom of the sign. (e)A projecting sign may extend over a public right-of-way or public pedestrian walkway up to six (6) feet past the property line, but in no case shall the sign extend over a street or other area used by motor vehicles. (f)The setbacks for freestanding signs may be reduced to zero (0), provided the sign complies with the vision clearance requirements. (g)Freestanding signs shall not extend beyond property lines. (Ord. 5046 §5, 2008; Ord. 4950 §8 (Exh. A) (part), 2005) 20.52.120RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT SIGN REGULATIONS. The following regulations apply to properties in residential zones: (a)Freestanding Signs. (1)Entrance Signs. One (1) freestanding sign may be permitted at each street entrance to a neighborhood, subdivision, manufactured park, apartment/condominium complex, orother homogeneous residential area,school, church, park, or legally established nonconforming use within the residential zoneprovided: (i)The sign specifically identifies the developmentor businessonly; (ii)The sign area is fifty (50) square feet or less. (2)Multiple-Family Developments. A residential development having four (4) or more dwelling units may have one (1) permanent freestanding sign per street frontage, provided the total sign area does not exceed four (4) square feet. (3)Individual Properties. Each residential property may have one (1) freestanding permanent sign that shall not exceed two (2) square feet in sign area. (4)Height. Freestanding signs shall have a maximum height of six (6) feet as measured from grade directly below the sign to the highest point on the sign or its support structure. ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡4 Attachment I (b)Building Signs. (1)The freestanding sign limitations prescribed in subsections (a)(1) through (3) of this section may be applied to building signs in lieu of freestanding signs. (c)Resident name plaques and address numbers shall not be included in total sign area calculations, but shall be limited to a size and character of other such signs in the immediate neighborhood. (d)Advertising wind signs or devices that flutter, wave, revolve, or sparkle, or are otherwise moved by the wind are prohibited. 20.52.130SPECIAL PURPOSE SIGN REGULATIONS. Special purpose signs shall comply with the requirements for the commercial zone as prescribed in BMC20.52.100. When an established business is located in the low density residential zone, the special purpose sign regulations shall apply. In addition, the following shall apply: (a)Freestanding Signs. (1)Sign Area. The maximum area of a freestanding sign shall be limited to fifty (50) square feet. (2)Number of Signs. Only one (1) freestanding sign is allowed per each street frontage. (3)Height. The height of a freestanding sign shall not exceed six (6) feet. (b)Building Signs. (1)Sign Area. The aggregate area of all building signs, projecting signs, and other signs attached to buildings shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet. (2)Number of Signs. There is no limit to the number of individual building signs, provided the maximum aggregated sign area is maintained. (c)Illumination. When located within the low density residential zone, the sign shall not be illuminated between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (Ord. 4971 §13, 2006: Ord. 4950 §8 (Exh. A) (part), 2005) 20.52.160DOWNTOWN ZONESANDWICH BOARD PORTABLE SIGNS. Portable signs, such as Sandwich boardssigns located with the downtown and centers zones may be placed on sidewalks or portions of the pedestrian public right-of-way subject to the following conditions: (a)A minimum four (4) feet of unobstructed sidewalk or pedestrian path must be maintained. A portablesandwich boardsign shall not be allowed on sidewalks with less than four (4) feet in width. (b)PortableSandwich boardsigns may not be placed in the driving lanes of a public street or in parking stalls on the public right-of-way. (c)One (1) sandwich boardportable signis allowed for any licensed business. The sign must be displayed within the same numbered block, on the same side of the street immediately adjacent to theas themain entrance of the business employing the sign. (d)PortableSandwich boardsigns shall not exceed thirty-two (32) inches in width or thirty-six (36) inches in height as displayed. (e)PortableSandwich boardsigns shall be professionally lettered, neatly painted or assembled, and remain in good repair. ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡5 Attachment I (f)PortableSandwich boardsigns shall be constructed to avoid being blown from their intended location and to avoid tipping or falling. (g)PortableSandwich boardsigns shall not be internally lit, not have moving parts, nor shall any attachment or portion of the sign extend beyond the thirty-two (32) by thirty- six (36) inch maximum dimensions established in subsection (d) of this section. (h)PortableSandwich boardsigns shall be displayed during daylight hours only and shall be removed by the business owner immediately after dusk each day. (i)Any site landscaping required by the City shall not be altered to accommodate a sandwich board sign. (j)PortableSandwich boardsigns shall not block intersections or otherwise constitute a public safety hazard. (k)Placement of portablesandwich board signs on the public right-of-way in violation of this section will result in immediate removal of the sign from the public right-of-way by City personnel. (Ord. 4950 §8 (Exh. A) (part), 2005) 20.52.170SANDWICH BOARD AND PORTABLE SIGNS -ALL ZONES. Sandwich board signs and portable signs not located within a downtown or center zone are allowed in other nonresidential zones subject to the following conditions: (a)Sandwich board and portable signs must comply with the requirements set forth in BMC20.52.160(b) through (k). (b)Sandwich board signs may be located within a public right-of-way, provided the sign is no more than twelve (12) inches from the face of the structure. (c)Sandwich board signs not located within the public right-of-way shall be no more than twelve (12) inches from the face of the structure. (d)Portable signs shall not be located within a public right-of-way and shall be located within five (5) feet of the principal commercial structure that the sign is associated with. (Ord. 4950 §8 (Exh. A) (part), 2005) 20.52.180NONCONFORMING SIGNS. (a)Applicability. This section applies to the maintenance, repair, amortization, as appropriate, and removal of nonconforming signs."Nonconforming sign" means a sign that was legally established, but no longer conforms to the current sign standards of this title. (b) Maintenance and Repair of Off-premise Signs. Any nonconforming off- premise sign shall immediately lose its legal nonconforming designation, and be removed or brought into conformity with the provisions of this chapter, when one (1) or more of the following events occur: (1)Alterations to sign: (i) Any structural alteration to an off-premise sign shall result in the loss of its nonconforming status. This does not include replacing the signs message or painting. (ii) In no case shall an off-premise sign’sbe permitted to be expanded or enlarged. Adding electronic components or modifying the sign to an electronic deviceconstitutes an expansion and is therefore prohibited; or (c)Maintenance and Repair of On-premise Signs. Any nonconforming on- premisesign shall immediately lose its legal nonconforming designation, and be removed or brought into conformity with the provisions of this chapter, when one (1) or more of the following events occur: (1)Alterations to sign: ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡6 Attachment I (i)In no case shall an on-premisesign be permitted to be expanded or enlarged; or (ii)For freestanding signs, refacing the sign with a new message is permitted, however if the cabinetry housing the sign is removed, or is intended to be replaced, the sign shall lose its nonconforming status; or (iii)If alterations are made to the sign that exceed twenty-five (25) percent of the replacement cost of the sign it shall lose its nonconforming status. (2)Alteration to associated business or site: Should a business with a nonconforming sign undergo remodel or site improvements, the sign shall lose its nonconforming status under the following circumstanceswhichever is more restrictive: (i)Onsite construction/improvements costs exceedone hundredthousand (100,000) dollars; or (ii)The renovation, construction, or other site improvements exceed seventy-five (75) percent of the assessed improvement value of the site. (3)Cessation: If the sign has not utilized for advertismentfor an existing business on the subject property for one (1) year or more the sign shall lose its nonconforming status.(b)Definitions. (1)"Effective date of this section" means the effective date of the ordinance adopting this section: July 25, 2003. (2)"Nonconforming sign" means any sign as defined in Chapter20.42BMC. (3)"Section" means BMC20.52.180unless otherwise defined. (c)Eligibility. Any nonconforming sign located within the City limits on the effective date of this section, or located in areas annexed to the City thereafter that does not conform to the provisions of this section, is eligible for characterization as a legal nonconforming sign, provided it meets the following requirements: (1)A permit for the sign was obtained prior to the effective date of this section, if one was required under applicable law; or (2)If no sign permit was required under applicable law for the sign, the sign was in all respects in compliance with applicable law on the effective date of this section. (d)Allowed. All legal nonconforming signs are allowed subject to all permit requirements, the provisions covering loss of legal nonconforming status and other limitations set forth in this section. (e)Exclusions. No temporary signs, portable signs, special signs, or incidental signs shall be eligible for characterization as legal nonconforming signs. (f)Legal Nonconforming Sign Permit. (1)Required. A legal nonconforming sign permit is required for each legal nonconforming sign. The permit shall be obtained by the sign user or the sign owner, or the owner of the property upon which the sign is located, within sixty (60) days of notification by the City that the sign is legal nonconforming. The permit shall be issued at no fee and shall expire at the end of the applicable amortization period prescribed in subsection (g) of this section. (2)Necessary Information. Applications for a legal nonconforming sign permit shall contain the name and address of the sign user, the sign owner, or the owner of the property upon which the sign is located, and such other pertinent information as the Director may require ensuring compliance with the code, including proof of the date of installation of the sign. (3)Failure to Comply. A legal nonconforming sign for which no permit has been issued within the sixty (60) day period shall within six (6) months be brought into ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡7 Attachment I compliance with the code or be removed. Failure to comply shall subject the sign user,owner and/or owner of the property on which the sign is located to the remedies and penalties of BMC20.40.200. (g)Amortization. (1)In order to ease the economic impact of this code on businesses or persons with substantial investment in signs in existence on the effective date of this section, this section provides for up to five (5) or ten (10) years, as applicable, of the continued useof the nonconforming sign in its existing state. During this period, it is expected that the sign may be amortized in its value over this time period and/or may be amortized for federal income tax purposes; provided, however, that whether a sign is amortized for tax purposes shall not affect the application of this section. (2)All legal nonconforming signs shall be discontinued and removed or made conforming within ten (10) years from the effective date of this section for billboard signs and within five (5) years from the effective date of this section for off-premises signs (the "amortization period"). Additionally, all signs which are made nonconforming by a subsequent amendment to the zoning code, this chapter, or by subsequent action or activity such as government acquisition of property for right-of-way pursuant to BMC20.52.190shall be discontinued, removed, or made conforming within theapplicable amortization period after the date of such amendment, action or activity. Upon the expiration of the amortization period, the sign shall be brought into conformance with this section through the issuance of a sign permit. A sign prohibited pursuant to BMC20.52.050may not be brought into conformance and must therefore be immediately removed upon the expiration of the amortization period. Amortization is the sole method of compensation for removal of signs pursuant to this section. (3)Permitting,Removal and Amortization Exemption. The permitting,removal and amortization provision of subsections(f)and (g) of this section do not apply to any sign which would require the City to pay compensation for its removal under any federal, state or other law, including Chapter47.42RCW, the Highway AdvertisingControl Act -Scenic Vistas Act. (4)Loss of Legal Nonconforming Sign Status. under any of the following circumstances: (i) structural to the sign that exceed (25%)twenty-fivepercent of the replacement cost of the signit shall lose its nonconforming status; or (ii) For freestanding signs,re-facing the sign with a new message is permitted, however if the cabinetryhousing the sign is removed, orisintended to be replaced, the sign shall lose its nonconforming status;or (iii)Any structural alteration to an off-premise sign shall result in the loss of its nonconforming status.This does not include replacing the signs message or painting. (iii) In no case shall a nonconforming sign be permitted to be expanded or enlarged.Adding electronic components that move, flash, or change copy is not permitted.businessor site:Shouldabusiness with a nonconforming signundergo remodel or site improvements, the sign shall lose its nonconforming status under any of the following circumstances: (i) The renovation, construction, or other site improvements exceedimprovement e site; or (ii) Onsite construction/improvement costs exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡8 Attachment I :If tbusinessthe sign is advertising for the sign shall lose its nonconforming status.All nonconforming signs shall be immediately removed or modified to conform to all the provisions of this chapter, and a new permit secured therefor, and such nonconforming sign shall immediately lose its legal nonconforming designation when one (1) or more of the following events occur: (i)Structural Changes. The applicant is making structural alterations or increasing the gross floor area of any structure that houses or supports the use with which the legal nonconforming sign is associated. (ii)Other Alterations. The applicant is making any change, alteration or performing work other than normal maintenance or other than tenant improvements, in any twelve (12) month period to any structure that houses or supports the use with which the nonconforming sign is associated and the fair market value of those changes, alterations or other work exceeds twenty-five (25) percent of the assessed value of that structure based on the building permit valuation tables. (iii)Abandonment or Business Cessation. The subject property containing the sign is abandoned for ninety (90) or more consecutive days or the activity conducted on the subject property ceases for onehundred eighty (180) consecutive days. (iv)Sign Alterations. The applicant is making changes, alterations or performing any work to the legal nonconforming sign other than regular and normal maintenance. Prohibited sign alterations include enlarging the sign face, relocating the sign or replacing the sign. However, replacing any individual tenant’s identification sign in either an identification sign which separately identifies the tenants or in a tenant directory sign shall not result in the loss of such sign’s legal nonconforming sign designation. (v)Change in Use. There has been a change in use on the subject property, as that term is defined in this chapter. (vi)Change in Tenant. There has been a change in business or change in single- occupancy tenant on the subject property. In connection with any multi-use or multitenant complex, the foregoing events which require that a nonconforming sign be either removed or brought into conformance with this code shall apply only to the individual owner’s or tenant’s building-mounted or freestanding signs that have triggered the elimination of the legal nonconformance and not to the other signs located on the subject property, including any copy change in a center identification or tenant directory sign in order to include such tenant’s name. (Ord. 4950 §8 (Exh. A) (part), 2005) 4 Freestanding Signs: Zone-Specific Size and Design Requirements Freestanding Sign 1, 2 Commercial ZonesTypeMax. HeightMax. Size Commercial Corridor (CC)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. Wheaton Way Redev. Corr. Monument only8'60 sq. ft. (WWRC) Neighborhood Business (NB)Monument only68'6048sq. ft. Limited Commercial (LC)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡9 Attachment I 3 Freeway Corridor (FC)Any35'100 sq. ft. Marine Industrial (MI)Monument only8'100 sq. ft. Industrial Park (IP)Monument only8'100 sq. ft. Industrial (I)Any25'- Institutional (INST)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. Downtown and Centers ZonesFreestanding Sign Max. HeightMax. Size Type Neighborhood Center Core (NCC)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. District Center Core (DCC)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. Downtown Core (DC)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. Downtown Waterfront (DW)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. Business Core (BC)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. Employment Center (EC)Monument only8'60 sq. ft. Employment Center and Institutional Consistency Both zones are very similar in terms of allowed uses. Revisions intend to provide consistent language between the two zones to ensure the terms used are defined and are similar between both zoning districts. 20.92.020OUTRIGHT PERMITTED USES. The following uses are permitted outright: (a)Co-location of wireless telecommunications facilities per BMC20.46.140; (b)Community use facility; (c)Day care facility, all; (d)General office and business services; (e)Finance, insurance and real estate; (f)General retail; (g)Hotels and lodging places; (h)Medical offices; (i)Outdoor athletic fields; (j)Park playgrounds and open space, and parks; (k)Personal service business; (l)Physical fitness and health clubs; (m)Public administration; (n)Residential uses of the following types: (1)Group residential facility -Class I; (2)Multi-unit structureNursing convalescent home; (3)Nursing convalescent homeSenior housing complex; (4)Senior housing complexSingle-unit structure, attached or detached; ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡10 Attachment I (5)Single-unit structure, attached or detachedMulti-unit structure; (6)Townhouse; (o)Restaurants and drinking places; (p)Schools and education uses; (q)Transportation facility; (r)Veterinary clinic; (s)Worship and religious facility. (Ord. 5222 §21, 2013: Ord. 5008 §23, 2007: Ord. 4950 §8 (Exh. A) (part), 2005) 20.98.020OUTRIGHT PERMITTED USES. The following uses are permitted: (a)Co-location of wireless telecommunications facilities per BMC20.46.140; (b)Community facility; (c)General office and business services; (d)General retail associated with an institution; (e)Higher education and colleges; (f)Hospitals; (g)Medical offices and clinics; (h)Outdoor athletic fields and park playground and open spaces; (i)Parking as a principal use; (j)Public administration; (k)Residential uses of the following types: (1)Group residential facility -Class I; (2)Nursing convalescent home; (3)Senior housing complex; (4)Single-unitdwelling unitstructure,attached or detached; (5)Single-unit dwelling unit, attachedMulti-unit structure; (6) Townhouse; (l)Restaurants; (m)Schools and education uses; (n)Transportation facility; (o)Welfare and charitable services and facility; (p)Worship and religious facility. ‘‹‰‘†‡mendmentsƒ‰‡11 Attachment II FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION Summary: The proposed amendments to Bremerton Municipal Code include the repealing of Chapter 19 relating to mobile home parks and amending Title 20 Land Use Chapter, related to electric vehicle charging stations, sign code provisions and ensuring consistency between the Institutional and Employment Center Zones. I.FINDINGS OF FACT Project Description 1.: The proposed amendment package includes revisions to both Title 19 and Title 20 as follows: Repeal chapter 19 in its entirety. This chapter relates to mobile home parks. It is in conflict with other provisions of the BMC that address development standards and allowed locations for mobile homes. Add language to several sections of Title 20 to ensure the City’s code is in compliance with the State requirements for electric vehicle charging stations. Update the sign code to generally improve consistency and clarity, replace amortization with other requirements more in line with other nonconforming provisions within the BMC, and revise language relating to sandwich board signs for consistency between zoning districts. Revise the allowed residential use list in both the Employment Center Zone and Institutional Zone to ensure language is consistent between both and terms that are used are clearly defined. Procedural History 2.: 2.1Planning Commission Workshops:January 21,2014 2.2Notice of Public Hearing: February 8, 2014 2.3SEPA Threshold Determination DNS: February 10, 2014 2.4Planning Commission Public Hearing: February 18, 2014 Public Comment 3.: 3.1At the workshop held on January 21, 2014, public comment wereoffered by Rick Cadwell and Chris Campanawho were both in favor of modifications to the increase in residential uses allowed in the Institutional Zone. 3.2Written comment received to date:None 3.3At the February 18, 2014Planning Commission Public Hearing public testimonywas offered by:___________________________________________________________ SEPA Determination 4.: A Determination of Non-Significance was issued on February 10, 2014, to date no comments or appeals have been filed. 1 Consistency 5.: Text amendments to Title 20 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 Title 20 if the criteria outlined below are met. (1)It is consistent with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan; Analysis: The proposed amendments continue to uphold the objectives and goals of the Comprehensive Plan, and implement the following policies: CC2A:Utilize zoning and design standards that have flexibility and incentives to ensure excellence in urban design, and which are compatible with surrounding land uses. CC2B:Ensure that infill construction and area redevelopment are done in a manner that reinforces the neighborhood’s desired and defined character and that architecturally compliments the commercial and residential areas. LU3A:Provide development incentives and flexibility within the Zoning Code to encourage desirable design elements with flexibilities within the Zoning Code provisions for all new development and redevelopment. EC1C:Encourage redevelopment of underutilized land. EC5A:Expedite the permit and development process. (2)It does not conflict with other City,state and federal codes, regulations and ordinances. Analysis:The proposed amendments do not conflict with any other regulations. II.CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings above, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposed amendments to the Bremerton Municipal Code Title 20 Land Use Chapter, meets the requirements in BMC 20.18.020(d) text amendments, and therefore recommends to the City Council, the adoption of amendments to Title 20. Respectfully submitted by: _____________________________________ Andrea L. Spencer, Executive Secretary Approved by: ________________________________ Richard L. Tift, Chair 2 Commission Meeting Date: February 18, 2014 Agenda Item: VI.C.1 CITYOFBREMERTON,WASHINGTON PLANNINGCOMMISSIONAGENDAITEM AGENDA TITLE: Educational Workshop to discuss Centers of the Comprehensive Plan specifically the Wheaton Riddell Sub-Area DEPARTMENT: Community Development PRESENTED BY: Nicole Floyd, Senior Planner SUMMARY In 2005, the City adopted the “Centers Concept” within the Comprehensive Plan. These 13 centers are integral elements in the plan as they are intended to accommodate the vast majority of Bremerton’s growth. Each center was intended to go through a neighborhood level planning process where each center would end up with its own specific regulations for development. In this way, each center would maintain its unique character while accommodating growth. Each was given placeholder zoning to allow for development until a Sub-Area Plan was created. To date 6 Sub-Area Plans have been adopted. Staff will be presenting a series of workshops to the Planning Commission over the next few months focusing on different “Centers” throughout the City. Staff anticipates that by focusing on the “Centers”the Commission will become more familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of the current Comprehensive Plan and therefore more prepared to address what should be maintained and what should be changed in the upcoming update. Atthisworkshop, Staff will be providing specific information about the Wheaton / Riddell Sub- Area Plan (WRSAP) which was adopted in 2007. This plan can be reviewed online at: http://www.ci.bremerton.wa.us/display.php?id=439During the workshop Staff will be providing a general overview of the Sub-Area’s unique features, history, and difficulties developers and Staff have had implementing its policies and regulations. AttachmentI: Centers section of the Comprehensive Plan AttachmentI Comprehensive Plan Excerpts on Centers NC² EIGHBORHOOD ENTERS Haddon Neighborhood Center Manette Neighborhood Center Perry Avenue Neighborhood Center Sylvan Pine Neighborhood Center Oyster Bay Neighborhood Center Kitsap Lake Neighborhood Reserve Center DC- ISTRICT ENTERS Wheaton Riddell District Center Charleston District Center Wheaton / Sheridan District Center Downtown Regional Center EC- MPLOYMENT ENTERS Harrison Employment Center South Kitsap Industrial Area Manufacturing / Industrial Center &HQWHUV'HVFULSWLRQV While this Plan employs four types of Centers (Neighborhood Centers, District Centers, Employment Centers and the Downtown Regional Center), no two centers are envisioned to be H[DFWO\DOLNH:KLOHWKH&HQWHUV·W\SHVDUHEDsed on sound planning principals that assess proper mixes of uses, critical quantities of residential and commercial uses, and proven design principals, there is a range of mixes and design approaches that can be successful. Withinthatrange,eachcenterwillvarysomewhatasitrespondstolocalpreferencesaswellasits neighborhoodenvironmentandspecificfunctionwithinthelargerfabricoftheCity.Followingageneral eachuniquecenter.Moredetailed, discussionofeachtypeofCenter,thereisadetaileddescriptionof future,implementationplanningforeachcenterwillfurtherrecognizelocalinterestandneeds. 1HLJKERUKRRG&HQWHUV²*HQHUDO'HVFULSWLRQ Neighborhood Centers are the smaller of the two general types and provide a focus for a single neighborhood area of approximately one square mile. Neighborhood Centers place key services in locations, within a designed setting that encourages walking and reduces dependence on automobile travel. This serves neighborhoods while reducing automobile use, traffic congestion, and pollution in Bremerton. In the early stages of implementation of the Centers concept in Bremerton, however, the first Neighborhood Centers may be expected to serve somewhat larger areas until additional Neighborhood Centers become viable. The physical size, projected population, and land uses needed within a Neighborhood Center are calculated, with additional consideration to the surrounding residential areas, to ensure a market 1 AttachmentI base for new businesses. Small grocery stores, shops, professional offices, and public services are encouraged. Moderately intense residential use is incorporated above the commercial spaces, ZLWKLQPL[HGXVHVWUXFWXUHVDQGQHDUDFHQWHU·VFRre to create a busy, pedestrian-oriented area. Pedestrian designs are given the greatest preference possible in planning and implementing a Neighborhood Center. Neighborhood Centers typically have at least onH´IRFXVDPHQLW\µVXFKDVDSDUNRSHQVSDFH civic space, or public facility such as a school or post office. In sum, Neighborhood Centers place convenient and attractive mixed uses within easyZDONLQJGLVWDQFHRIDPDMRULW\RI%UHPHUWRQ·V citizens, providing a place for social contact, and a pleasing urban experience. Haddon Neighborhood Center The Haddon Neighborhood Center serves neighborhoods in the northern portions of West Bremerton. This Center generally surrounds its core area found at the intersection of Callow Avenue and North 15th Street. Nestled in an established single- family area, but near the more intense Charleston District Center, the Haddon Center provides neighborhood commercial and professional services to residents in the Marine Drive, Rocky Point, and North Lafayette Avenue areas, as well as to neighborhoods in closer proximity. Recognizing that some market energy will be directed to the nearby district center, this center will be characterized by a relatively small core area which will provide mixed use structures of two or three stories with residential uses above commercial street-level uses. Predominant uses will be convenience businesses providing basic services to neighborhood residents. Small one and two story apartment structures will surround the core with duplex, triplex and fourplex residential units approaFKLQJWKHFHQWHU·VORZ density edge. Haddon Park, along the western side of the center, provides a focus amenity for the Haddon Neighborhood Center. More intense uses may infill the area between the Center Core and Haddon Park. Similarly, higher density residential uses will be appropriate south of the Center Core as this area provides a link to the nearby Charleston District Center. T he Haddon Neighborhood Center is 27 acres. The population will reach about 1,080 residents. Commercial and professional space will be approximately 126,000 square feet with a potential employment base of 350 people. 2 AttachmentI Manette Neighborhood Center The Manette Center will accommodate approximately 1,320 residents within 33 acres. Employment will grow to as many as 430 persons. The Manette Neighborhood Center serves the well-defined Manette neighborhood east of the Port Washington Narrows. The Manette peninsula is characterized by dense single family residential neighborhoods that enjoy spectacular views to the Narrows, Sinclair Inlet, downtown Bremerton and other points. The scale and design characteristics of this center will 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 typically exceed three or four stories. The core area will provide an attractive environment for small shops, restaurants, and specialty businesses. 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 core area, this Center will encourage an increase in residential density by strategically placing small apartment structures and townhomes in a way that protects the views of others while preserving their own views. Duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes will locate towards the low density edge of the Center. Perry Avenue Neighborhood Center The Perry Avenue Neighborhood Center will be established near the intersection of N.E. Sheridan Road and Perry Avenue. A significant portion of the Center is currently occupied by a shopping center. Potential redevelopment of this shopping center presents an opportunity to create an attractive civic space as a focus for this Center. The ´KLOOWRSµQDWXUHRIWKLV location will enable significant increases in building height without negatively impacting existing views in the area. 3 AttachmentI This is an opportunity foU´KLJKULVHµUHVLGHQWLDO structures that are attractive view homes in their own right. Surrounding the civic space at the Center Core, mixed use structures of four to five stories will be encouraged. Residential uses above street level storefronts and offices will bring fairly high levels of pedestrian activity to the Perry Avenue Center. Both Perry Avenue and Sheridan Road are important secondary arterials; alternative circulation routes within the Center, and parking under or behind core structures can be created to increase the pedestrian orientation of this center. The Perry Avenue Neighborhood Center is Uses outside of the Center Core will be less tall, approximately 27 acres in size, with a projected mixed-use structures and smaller multifamily population of about 1,080 residents and structures. Significant amounts of mid-density employment of approximately 350 persons. residential uses already exist near the eastern and VRXWKHUQERXQGDULHVRIWKLVFHQWHU²PDNLQJ transition to the single family areas beyond easier. Primary uses in the Perry Avenue Neighborhood Center will be residential, commercial, and offices that support the center population and serve the neighborhood population in the vast surrounding areas. Sylvan Pine Neighborhood Center The Sylvan/Pine Neighborhood Center is in the vicinity of its namesake intersection, in the area west of Wheaton Way. The center serves large areas of residential development in that region. Its location is currently characterized by two or three story apartment complexes. Redevelopment under the Center designation will focus on introducing mixed-use structures that add commercial and professional services to the area. Amenities are already provided by an attractive wetland complex and by the Armin The Sylvan/Pine Neighborhood Center is -DKU6FKRRODQG%OXHEHUU\3DUN²DOOORFDWHG approximately 30 acres in size. It can within the Center designation. Redevelopment at accommodate roughly 1,200 residents. Total the boundary of the park offers an opportunity employment capacity is 390 persons. for a center that incorporates a green space as its focus. 4 AttachmentI The Sylvan/Pine Neighborhood Center will be characterized by relatively small-scale mixed use structures of perhaps two or three stories. Arrangement of these adjacent to the potential green space creates an opportunity for a small center that, perhaps, reminds visitors of a small town in the mid-west that faces a town park. Existing or new multifamily structures will augment the new Center Core. The limited scale and intensity of commercial and professional uses will still allow the center to serve the neighborhood population. Oyster Bay Neighborhood Center The Oyster Bay Neighborhood Center is located on both sides of Kitsap Way, tying the existing commercial and tourist areas together with a future open space system. The area will redevelop alongside of a critical mass of residential units on site and in the adjacent Westpark project. There is enough depth on certain lots to accommodate a secondary road system which will help implement a more urban and pedestrian friendly design ethic here. Adjacent opportunities, such as play fields at Westpark and other public investment sites, should be integrated into a trail and open space system that highlights the remarkable views and provides access to the shoreline. In the portion of the center south of the arterial, mixed use structures of somewhat greater height will make up the Center Core, allowing commercial activity at street level with professional office and residential uses above. Special design standards and considerations must be employed to ensure both marine views throughout and compatibility of this center with The Oyster Bay Neighborhood Center is residential properties such as the community to approximately 37 acres. Sharing the same growth the north along the Oyster Bay shoreline. For market, population estimates for this center are example, structures on the north side of Kitsap combined with estimates for the Westpark Public Way should not obscure view potentials for Sector Redevelopment Opportunity Site structures on the south side of Kitsap Way. Slopes at the southernmost edge of the Center (See Tables 1 and 2 in Land Use Appendix). present an opportunity for residential structures Although the combined twenty year population of sufficient height to take advantage of views to expectation is substantial, approximately 1,332, the north. (See Table 2 LU Appendix) buildout at the Westpark site will run substantially ahead of In recognition of a shared market with the development at the Oyster Bay Center. This Plan Westpark Public Sector Redevelopment Site, the anticipates that only a small portion of that Oyster Bay Neighborhood Center will develop at population will locate at this center over the somewhat lower intensities than other planning period. Neighborhood Centers. 5 AttachmentI Kitsap Lake Neighborhood Reserve Center The Kitsap Lake Neighborhood Reserve Center is not expected to develop within the current 20- year planning horizon. Today, this location supports a medium sized grocery, a restaurant, and other small businesses. The site tends to serve as a convenience center for outlying rural areas as well as for residents in the Kitsap Lake area of the City, but not fitting the model of being the core of an urban neighborhood that yet to develop. Residential density in the area does not currently warrant or promise to support a Neighborhood Center for the current 3ODQ·VKRUL]RQ In the future, however, it is recognized that a Center will be appropriate in the far western areas of the City. It is recommended to preserve options for future redevelopment of this specific area as a Neighborhood Center. It is also understood that future trends for development in this general area could result in an alternative location becoming more appropriate for a future Neighborhood or This 48 acre Reserve Center lies along Kitsap Way District Center. near the intersection with Harlow Drive. This image shows the interface between a center (on left) and an existing low density neighborhood (on the right.) Sub-area planning and design regulations will further ensure compatibility with existing development. Here, urban densities on smaller lots do not detract from existing single family residential qualities. 6 AttachmentI 'LVWULFW&HQWHUV²*HQHUDO'HVFULSWLRQ District Centers are the larger Center type. They are sized and designed to provide a focus as well as services for several neighborhoods. Commercial and professional uses are more plentiful and of larger scale than those in Neighborhood Centers. Residential uses are also focused in more dense patterns. While District Centers are characterized by a District Centers must be responsive to pedestrian based design ethic, they also automobile access, as seen for this cinema. recognize that a segment of users will access a center by automobile. Distinguishing characteristics of the Center type are: alternative circulation to and from nearby arterials, parking immediately outside the pedestrian core, and, opportunities for locating medium intensity employers. District Centers will typically have several key ´IRFXVDPHQLWLHVµ,QWKHODUJHU'LVWULFW&HQWHUV focus amenities may be needed on either side of major arterials to minimize pedestrian/traffic conflicts. District Centers have community assets, such as a grocery store built to urban design goals and regulations. 7 AttachmentI Wheaton/Riddell District Center The Wheaton/ Riddell District Center is located in the area surrounding the intersection of Riddell Road and Wheaton Way. It is one of the largest centers in Bremerton, encompassing approximately 106 acres. This center is intendHGWRSURYLGHDPL[HGXVH´WRZQ&HQWHUµIRUD number of neighborhoods in the most northern regions of the City and for residents of unincorporated areas farther to the north. The Wheaton/Riddell District Center is bisected by :KHDWRQ:D\²DPDMRU 6WDWH DUWHULDO7KLVKDVseveral significant implications for the form of this Center. Foremost among these effects is that this center wLOOLQFRUSRUDWHDVSHFWVRID´&HQWHU ZLWKLQD&HQWHUµFRQFHSW On the east side of Wheaton Way, this center will include many of the characteristics of a Neighborhood Center. Along Wheaton Way proper, and within the entire area the west side of Wheaton Way, the Center will display characteristics that are reserved elsewhere for the larger District Centers. In addition, this center will recognize that it serves a regional population, some of whom must access the center by car. Higher levels of parking are retained here than in other centers. Parking is generally placed behind street-fronting buildings or moved to areas near the perimeter of the center. Careful attention is necessary in the planning and design of this center to create a pedestrian friendly environment while still accommodating a certain level of regional, auto-dependent uses. 8 AttachmentI East Portion. The east portion of the Wheaton/Riddell District Center will be characterized by a high density mixed- use node that provides an open space or public plaza as a community focus. Existing frontage parking lots may be redeveloped to provide both on-street mixed-use structures and the needed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit spaces. The mixed-use structures may be up to five stories with commercial uses on the street level and a mix of professional or residential uses above. Some small parking areas along Wheaton Way may remain. These will be to primarily provide customer parking for the smaller shops, restaurants, and commercial uses that will come to dominate the street-frontage. Taken together, the two portions of the Wheaton/Riddell District Center accommodate On the west side of Wheaton Way, :HVW3RUWLRQ approximately 3800 persons (as much as this center provides for somewhat more intense 660,000 square feet of commercial/professional commercial uses and employment sites. Small (floor space), and provide employment for street fronting commercial structures should be approximately 1850 persons. introduced along Wheaton Way. These may include second story residential uses. More significant levels of parking may continue immediately behind street-side buildings here. Existing commercial structures at the rear of existing parking lots may continue to provide significant amounts of region-serving commercial space, or be removed and replaced with mixed-use structures up to five stories. As in the eastern portion of this center, a secondary circulation loop should be introduced behind existing structures or their replacements. In this area, an existing topographic break provides separation between the center boundary and neighborhoods to the west (towards Pine Road.) Charleston District Center The Charleston District Center is a unique District Center located along Callow Way between North 13th Street and North 1st Street. This Center designation seeks to encourage redevelopment of a historic business district that KDVORQJEHHQFRQVLGHUHGDV%UHPHUWRQ·VVHFRQG downtown. The historic, street fronting structures that dominate the existing landscape already embody many of the key characteristics RID´&HQWHUµ7KH\SURYLGHDYDULHW\RIVHUYLFHV for adjacent residential areas and are part of a pedestrian-oriented streetscape with potential for floors above active street-level uses. 9 AttachmentI The Center designation seeks to build on this existing nucleus. Areas on the surrounding blocks will be designated for mixed-use or fairly dense residential structures. This will serve to bring more residents to the immediate area, improving the viability of existing and new business ventures. New buildings that infill along Callow Avenue should be mixed-use to include high density residential uses. Areas west of Callow should infill with small artists workshops, light service industries, or office uses with residential uses beginning at the third floor level. Heights above this level could threaten views from hillsides to the west. Buildings to the east, along Montgomery Avenue (along the Center boundary with existing low density residential uses) should not exceed two stories. The Charleston District Center is approximately Emphasis in the Charleston District Center should 39 acres in size. It will accommodate approximately be on historic preservation, better utilization of 1400 persons, with employment for as many as existing second floor spaces, and the addition of 680 people. Finally, the center is separated from new residential uses in areas immediately adjacent the Haddon Neighborhood Center to the north by to the Center Core along Callow Avenue. only one or two blocks. Land use designations in Amenities such as pocket parks, or plazas should this intervening area should support both centers also be encouraged. The adopted Charleston by allowing fairly high density residential uses. Community Plan will be resource and beginning Building heights in this area should approach six point for area-specific planning of the Charleston stories with densities in the area of 40 units per District Center. acre. Wheaton/Sheridan District Center 10 AttachmentI The Wheaton/Sheridan District Center is located on the east side of Wheaton Way, north of its intersection with Sheridan Road. This center provides intense commercial and professional uses serving neighborhoods on the southern half of the East Bremerton peninsula. Recognizing the neighborhood significance of the relatively new grocery store at the corner of Wheaton and Sheridan, this center will first focus on redevelopment of the Bremerton School sites into a mixed use area in a pedestrian-based urban village atmosphere. This urban village will provide residential opportunities along a major This 81 acre Center will accommodate approximately transit route, close to downtown, and within easy 2900 persons within the 20-year planning horizon pedestrian reach of a large variety of employment with further expansions possible in the future. and shopping sites. Employment base in the first 20-years could grow to 500,000 square feet and 1400 employees. Along Wheaton Way, four to five story mixed - use structures, with commercial uses at street level will be encouraged. These structures should enclose an interior Center Core area and its focus amenity or civic space. Residential units will benefit from an orientation towards the interior and green spaces. Nearby medical offices and the Harrison Hospital will also support convenience such as recreation and retail. Office uses, mostly expected along an interior network of streets, can accommodate parking areas that do not disrupt to the pedestrian design of the Center Core or result in parking lots fronting Wheaton Way. Additionally, this area (between the core and Wheaton Way) can accommodate mixed use structures or residential structures of no more than four stories. Towards the residential perimeters of the center, residential uses should be further reduced in mass and height, responding to the existing neighborhoods beyond. Downtown Regional Center 11 AttachmentI The Downtown Regional Center (DRC)is the core area of the City of Bremerton. It offers a mix of opportunities to live and work in a vibrant, well-designed environment. The DRC zone provides residential or office uses on upper floors, with retail uses at the street level to energize the urban experience. Parking should be underground or within structures - not in surface lots. Street trees, well-designed public gathering areas, and lighting should be employed to create a safe, inviting experience at the street level day and night. Residents will find access to employment, transportation, and basic amenities, along with a concentration of restaurants, galleries, and unique shopping experiences. The Downtown Regional Center designation facilitates the ongoing creation of a vibrant, attractive downtown, a critical need for the entire West Sound region. Existing plans for the Downtown Core and Downtown Waterfront (See goal LU14) and the Campus/Evergreen District Plan will be a beginning point for sub-area planning and design review for this center. The downtown provides a living environment to a growing segment of society that no longer desires the suburban lifestyle. It provides housing for a wide variety of income levels in an environment that allows less reliance on the automobile. The potential juxtaposition of employment, living, cultural, and recreation opportunities, allows the greatest efficiency of public expenditures and infrastructure of any development envisioned in this Plan. (PSOR\PHQW&HQWHUV²*HQHUDO'HVFULSWLRQ 12 AttachmentI Employment Centers are mixed-use environments characterized by co-location of employment activities, and residential, and commercial amenities for workers. Employment Centers will have significant office, light industrial, and industrial activities that create large numbers of jobs, well integrated with areas that provide a mix of housing types nearby. Small to medium scale commercial uses will also be provided, allowing residents and workers easy access to services. Through mixed-use design, the Employment Center integrates employment activities with housing and commercial activities scaled to serve the employee population at the center. This reduces home to workplace commuting and offers workers opportunities to lunch, or do shopping for essentials on-site, without additional travel. Although the scale of employment activities is such that some employees will likely commute, the Employment Center concept can reduce the amount of traffic normally generated by large-scale employment land use. Harrison Employment Center The Harrison Employment Center is an established area of mixed commercial and office uses, associated with Harrison Hospital. Establishment of a formal designation as an Employment Center will enable future zoning and development standards that support addition of residential uses to the area. As a result, residents will be added to increase support for commercial services. Nearby living opportunities for employees will reduce commuting as well as employee parking demands. The adopted Harrison District Community Plan is a resource and beginning point for sub-area specific planning of this Employment Center. Kitsap Port Blakely Employment Center The Port Blakely Employment Center is a large Lake undeveloped area in the west hills portion of the City. The site is envisioned as an integrated, mixed-use employment Center. A detailed Center development plan should be prepared for this area before its development. Employment Centers feature amenities enjoyed by both employees and residents. The planned environment ensures compatibility of development, including large employer needs such as private facilities and strategic parking areas 13 AttachmentI SKIA Manufacturing / Industrial Center (SKIA MIC) The South Kitsap Industrial Area (SKIA) has been long established by Kitsap County as an Urban Growth Area (UGA), and is identified in the Vision 2040 Regional Plan by Puget Sound Regional Council as one of eight QRUPDOO\GHVLJQDWHG´0anufacturing /Industrial &HQWHUVµ6.,$LVDSSUR[LPDWHO\DFUHVLQVL]HDQG is generally located southwest of the city, with the northern boundary of the UGA adjoining the City of Bremerton; the UGA has no adjacencies to any other municipality. The Port of Bremerton owns a significant portion of the property within SKIA, with their holdings being the Bremerton National Airport and the Olympic View Business and Industrial Parks, each accessed from State Highway 3. The SKIA Manufacturing/ Industrial Center (SKIA MIC) will retain a different form of urban GHYHORSPHQWWKDQ%UHPHUWRQ·VFXUUHQWUHJLRQDOor district centers. The physical size and location of this center allows strategic focused economic growth and it is expected to receive a significant proportion of KitsDS·VHPSOR\PHQWJURZWKLQWKe manufacturing and industrial sectors. It is expected that following substantial annexation of SKIA that the City will prepare a detailed sub area plan that addresses such items as development standards and permitted uses, revision of urban services and infrastructure, and the protection of essential public facilities such as the Bremerton National Airport. 14 DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ON 2/18/2014 City of Bremerton PLANNING COMMISSION RULES and BYLAWS I. AUTHORIZATION A. AUTHORIZATION 1.The City of Bremerton Planning Commission is created and authorized by the Bremerton Municipal Code, Chapter 2.12, entitled “Planning Commission”, City of Bremerton Ordinance No. 4069 and Article XI, Section II of the State Constitution. B. NAME 1.The name of this commission shall be the City of Bremerton Planning Commission, hereinafter referred to as “Commission”. II. ORGANIZATION A. MEMBERSHIP 1.The membership of the Commission shall be as set forth by Ordinance of the City. 2.At such time as a position is declared vacant by the Council or Mayor, action should be taken to fill the vacancy at the earliest possible date. B. ELECTION OF OFFICERS 1.Upon determining a quorum to be present, at the regularly scheduled meeting in the month of December November of each year, the Chairperson shall call for nominations from amongst the Commission membership and conduct an election for the succeeding Chairperson and Vice-chairperson of the Commission. The new Chairperson and Vice- chairperson shall take office in January. 2.Vacancies created by any cause shall be filled for the unexpired term by a new election at the next regular or special meeting. 3.The Chairperson and Vice-chairperson shall be limited to two consecutive terms in their respective offices. Rev. 8/20072/2014 DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ON 2/18/2014 C. OFFICERS AND DUTIES 1.The officers of the Commission shall be the Chairperson and Vice-chairperson, each of whom shall serve for one (1) year (January through December), and until their successors are elected and qualified. 2.It shall be the duties of the Chairperson to: (a)Preside at all meetings and direct all the rights, duties and prerogatives of the Planning Commission; (b)Meetmonthly with Planning Department staff to review the upcoming agenda; (c)Represent Planning Commission recommendations at City Council meetings if necessary; (cd)Appoint all committees. 3.It shall be the duties of the Vice-chairperson to: (a)Perform the duties of the Chairperson in the absence or disability of the Chairperson; (b)To serve as a liaison to the City Council. 4.In the event of the absence of both the Chairperson and Vice-chairperson at an official Commission function, the Executive Secretary shall so inform the membership and request a motion for an Interim Chairperson. Upon approval, the Executive Secretary shall turn the meeting over to the Interim Chairperson. D. SUGGESTED CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF OFFICERS 1.The Director of Community Development of the City of Bremerton, Washington, or the Director’s appointed representative, shall serve as the Executive Secretary and staff advisor to the Commission. 2.The Executive Secretary is responsible for maintaining Commission files, accomplishing administrative duties, and preparing an agenda for meetings. The goal for preparing and having available agenda packets for meetings shall be a minimum of five (5) calendar days in advance of a business meeting. The Planning Division of the Department of Community Development may be requested, as reasonable and within approved budget limitations, to assist the Commission with staff services necessary to carry out the work of the Commission. A secretary shall be provided by the Department of Community Development to prepare minutes conforming with Article VI (2) of the By-laws for pre- distribution approval by the Chairperson and keeps such records and perform such duties as prescribed by the Director. Rev. 8/20072/2014 DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ON 2/18/2014 3.The Executive Secretary will provide technical advice to the Commission and provide staff recommendations when requested. The Commission may not direct the Department of Community Development staff to conduct major studies, establish official policy, or establish Department work programs. 4.The Executive Secretary shall maintain a roster of attendance of the Commission and shall make periodic reports to the Mayor indicating Commission attendance patterns. III.DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION A. REGULAR MEETINGS 1.Meetings of the Planning Commission will be scheduled the third Tuesday of each month, convening at a predetermined time in the main floor meeting chambers of the th Norm Dicks Government Center (345 –6Street, Bremerton), or an agreed upon alternative meeting location. 2.By a majority vote or poll, the Planning Commission may establish an alternative meeting date. The meeting will be held no more than seven days before or seven days after the regularly scheduled meeting date. 3.The date, time and place, and items to bediscussed in public hearings will be advertised in accordance with applicable requirements. B. SPECIAL MEETINGS 1.The Commission may hold such special meetings as are deemed necessary by its Chairperson, by a majority of its members, or by the City Council. 2.Notice of such special meetings shall be given personally or by mail or email to each Commission member, and to each local radio and television station, local newspaper of general circulation, and other interested parties who request to be notified of such special meetings. Such notices shall be delivered personally or by mail at least twenty-four (24) hours before the time of such meeting. A special meeting shall not be called with less than forty-eight (48) hours notice, except by the consent of a majority of the Commission members. 3.When a special meeting is called, the call of the meeting shall include an agenda to be considered and only items on the agenda may be considered. C. COMMITTEE MEETINGS 1.Appointed committees of the Commission may hold such meetings as are deemed necessary and which are called as provided above for Special Meetings. 2.Committee meeting agenda items, at the discretion of the moderator or vote of members present, may or may not be opened to public comment or discussion. All meetings, except as expressly provided by law, shall be open to the public. Rev. 8/20072/2014 DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ON 2/18/2014 3.Appointed committees that are appointed for a specific one-time task involving information gathering or to formulate a position or recommendation for the Commission’s consideration need nothold advertised public meetings. V.QUORUM 1.A simple majority of the Commission as a whole shall constitute a quorum. No decisions, discussion, formal actions, nor other official business of the Commission may be conducted unless a quorum is present. 2.In the case of a meeting being interrupted by the loss of a quorum during the taking of public comments or testimony, the Commission may continue to accept and record all the public comments that are offered, but may not take any action on that agenda item, nor may continue to another agenda item, other than to adjourn. 3.When a quorum does not exist at a regularly scheduledor special meeting, a member or the Commission or the Executive Secretary may announce to all present that any public hearings are continued to a time, date, and location certain, thereby avoiding the need to re-advertise such public hearings. VI.VOTING 1.A simple majority of the quorum present at voting shall be required for passage of any matter before the Commission. 2.The minutes of the meeting shall reflect the ayes and nays cast on a particular measure as well as the vote of each member present. 3.Whenever a tie vote occurs, such a vote shall be considered no decision concluded. In such a case, the Chairperson shall call for a new motion, or hearing no new motion and determining the case under consideration cannot be resolved during the current meeting, shall announce and direct the case to be carried over to the next Commission agenda, at which time it shall be scheduled for further consideration; or, the Chairperson may direct the Executive Secretary to forward the request to the City Council with no recommendation accompanied by the minutes of the request. VII.CONFLICT OF INTEREST 1.A Commission member to whom some private benefit may come as a result of public action or by a private or business relationship with the applicant, may have a conflict of interest therefore and should not be a participant in that action. The private benefit may be direct or indirect and, in either case, the potential, not the actuality of a conflict of interest, should govern. A Commission member experiencing a potential conflict of interest shall declare his/her interest publicly. 2.When a member declares a potential conflict of interest, the member shall, prior to proceeding on the case, step down from his/her seat with the Commission and leave the Rev. 8/20072/2014 DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ON 2/18/2014 room for the duration o f the particular item. The record shall reflect that the member left the meeting room and shall reflect the member rejoining the proceeding. 3.In the event of a majority or all of the membership have a potential conflict of interest, the Commission shall first determine a reasonable method of rendering the decision prior to any proceeding on the case. VIII.RULES OF CONDUCT 1.The Chairperson shall act as spokesperson for the Commission. The Chairperson shall refrain from originating a motion in reference to the public business before the Commission while acting as Chairperson. 2.If the Chairperson wishes to originate a motion in regard to the public business at hand, the Chairperson must first relinquish the chair to an appropriate member and may not regain such chair until the conclusion of the specific business at hand. Members may request advice from the special knowledge of the Chairperson, in which case the Chairperson will confine his/her remarks to the information requested. 3.Members of the Commission and all persons present at the meeting will direct all comments to the Chairperson after being recognized by the said Chair. The Chairperson may give permission for Commission members to interrogate anyone giving testimony. Members of the audience shall notbe permitted to directly interrogate members of the Commission, staff, the applicant/appellant, or others present. 4.Members may pass notes to the Chair during hearings to call attention to points in consideration or other matters to be discussed. 5.When public hearings are in progress, all members should refrain from a show of emotions that can be interpreted as expressing approval or dissent. All members shall refrain from passing notes or engaging in muffled or whispered conversations between members not intended for edification of all those present. 6.When the Chairperson determines that all public discussion of the business at hand has been presented, he/she shall close the meeting to the public and call for deliberation by the Commission. 7.When a motion is presented, a second to the motion is necessary to ratify acceptance. The Chairperson shall call for discussion. The vote may not be attempted until all members signify that the discussion be concluded. 8.Members may call for a recess at any time. Acceptance may be at the descreti8onof the Chairperson, or in the eventof an objection, by a majority vote of the members present. 9.The Commission shall use the Rules of Conduct contained herein. However, in instances of difficulty, The Standard Code of Parliamentary Proceduremay be consulted for guidance. The secretary shall have a copy available in the meeting room for reference. Rev. 8/20072/2014 DRAFT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ON 2/18/2014 IX.PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTINGMEETINGS A. AGENDA 1.The agenda shall contain the following items in the order so stated; provided that upon approval by vote of the Commission, items may be arranged or deleted from the agenda. 2.At the opening of the meeting, the Commission shall confirm the agenda for the meeting by a vote. SUGGESTED AGENDA FORMAT I.CALL TO ORDER II.ROLL CALL III.APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA IV.APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES V.PUBLIC MEETING A.CALL TO THE PUBLIC B.PUBLIC HEARING VI.BUSINESS MEETING A.CHAIR REPORT B.DIRECTOR’S REPORT C.OLD BUSINESS D.NEW BUSINESS VII.ADJOURNMENT X.AMENDMENTS 1.Amendments to the Rules and By-laws of the Planning Commission may be proposed at any regular or special meeting of the Commission and acted upon at the following meeting. Changes require a majority vote of the full Planning Commission. Written and notarized proxy votes will be accepted. I certify the above to be accurate. JOHN COCKBURNRICHARD L. TIFT, ChairDATE ANDREA L. SPENCERDATE Executive Secretary Rev. 8/20072/2014