HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/06/05 AGENDA
FILE
CITY COUNCIL 345 6th Street, Suite 603, Bremerton, WA 98337-1873 03 (360) 473-5280
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
y~\\.eJ
8.
9.
JULY 6, 2005
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
PRE-COUNCIL STUDY SESSION: 5:00 - 5:30 P.M. in COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM 603
A. General Council Business
CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. in COMMUNITY CHAMBERS LOCATED ON FiRST FLOOR
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Invocation
MAYOR'S REPORT
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENTS
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Claims & Check Register (#AB05-146)
PUBLIC HEARING
A. Closed Record Hearing and Resolution No. 2970 regarding the Brandywine Preliminary
Planned Unit Development and Plat (File No. BP04-00404) (#AB05-147)
NERAL BUSINESS
A. Approval of Professional Services Agreement with HDG PLANNING AND DESIGN for Phase II
of Building 50 and Harborside Memorial Plaza Project (#AB05-148)
B. Resolution No. 2971 approving Boundary Line Adjustments for Capital Hill Fire Station and
Forest Ridge Park (#AB05-149)
PUBLIC RECOGNITION
COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS
10.
ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING
II Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodations provided upon request. Those requiring special
accommodations should contact the City Clerk's Office at (360) 473-5323 by noon on the Monday preceding the
Council meeting.
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTCn'-T
CITY COUJ>JCIL
BILL # 0 y-/fr:
51}
DA TE SUBh1ITTED:
8eEBtinSsIDro~Vg~m~bD&G~DDCEfiEb&ti~g~~6E~E&Be.&S~$e88@aa8SSSDsefie.gmbtimeBBeeS~EefiE~ee&eemEef
SUBJECT: Approval of Claims and Checks
Register
COllunittee Iv1eeting Date:
CCH.JNCILJ\1EETll-lGDate: 7-tP-o S
Department: Financial Services
Presenter: Cathy Johnson
Phone: 473-5296
SUl\!IMl\RY: Consent agenda item. Approval of payroll, checks and electronic fund transfers.
ATTACHMENTS:
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount):.
,"
APPROVALS:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
FISCALIBUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT: ~~ ~
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Approve:
CONSENT AGENDA fZ.I
1) Check#'s_?tJ / cJ 6?
~fo
through ~O II ref and EFT's W 3/ through Pf;3 t
in the amount of $ ~d7 ?/~ to i
in the amount of $) _
2) Regular Payroll for the pay period ending
3) Retiree Payroll for the pay period ending
COUNCIL ACTION: ~rove
in the amount of $
o Deny 0 Table
o Continue D No Action
DATE SUBMITTED: June 28, 2005
BIL~ # OS -1'17
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
lDA
........................................................................................
SUBJECT: Closed record hearing for the
Brandywine Preliminary Planned Unit
Development and Plat
Committee Meeting Date: NA
COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 6,2005
Department: DCD
Presenter: Robert Grumbach
Phone: 473-5379
SUMMARY: Hearing Examiner recommendation to approve a preliminary Planned Unit
Development and plat (File Number BP04-00404) to subdivide 9.45 acres ofland into 70 individual
lots for detached single-family residential development, three open space tracts, a tot lot, a covered
sports court, and guest parking, to be located on the east side of Pine Road, approximately 200 feet
south of Roswell Road. The recommendation include~twenty-nine (29) conditions to be imposed for
final plat approval.
ATTACHMENTS: (1) Procedures for Close Record Hearing. (2) Hearing Examiner
Recommendation. (3) Staff Report. (4) Site Plan. (5) SEPA. (6) Proposed resolution on Hearing
Examiner's recommendation. Note: Staff Report Appendicies A through 0 are available in the City
Council office
FISCAL IMP ACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None
APPROVALS:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
FISCAL/BUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT: Y OA--L-- V~,r=--.
RECOMMENDED MOTION. Move to pass resoluti~ a&.1o approving and adopting the
Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the Administrative Hearing Examiner and approve the
preliminary Planned Unit Development and plat for the Brandywine PUD subject to the proposed
conditions.
CONSENT AGENDA 0
COUNCIL ACTION: 0 Approve 0 Deny 0 Table
o Continue 0 No Action
PROCEDURE FOR CLOSED RECORD HEARING ON
HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION
I. STAFF REPORT AND PRESENTATION
1. After the Appearance of Fairness inquiry, Council President asks staff to
present Hearing Examiner Recommendation.
2. Pursuant to Council policies, no public comment permitted.
3. Council may ask questions of staff and applicant (discussion limited to the
record).
II. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
The Council may approve and adopt the hearing examiner's recommendation
unless one of the following conditions exists:
1. Proceedings were materially affected by irregularities in procedure.
2. Recommendation is outside the authority of the hearing examiner.
3. Recommendation is based on an erroneous interpretation of law.
4. Recommendation is not supported by substantial evidence.
5. Recommendation is based on clearly erroneous application oflaw to facts.
III. DECISION
The Council may take any of the following actions:
1. Approve and adopt the hearing examiner's findings and recommendation.
2. Modify and approve the findings and recommendation.
3. Reject and deny the hearing examiner's findings and recommendation on
the proposal as originally submitted based upon council findings.
4. Continue the closed record hearing and remand to the hearing examiner
for clarification on issues of record (no public testimony).
R:\LEGAL\Departments-General\City Council\City Council Procedure re hearing exam recom.doc
RESOLUTION NO. d Cf1 0
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, approving the preliminary Brandywine
Planned Unit Development and plat (file No. BP04-00404).
WHEREAS, the City received a preliminary Planned Unit Development and plat
application for "Brandywine PUD" from Jerry Clark: and
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2005 the City Administrative Hearing Examiner held an
open-record hearing on the application pursuant to BMC 21.02.855; and
WHEREAS, The City's Administrative Hearing Examiner has submitted
recommended findings to the City Council; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby approve and adopts the findings,
conclusions and recommendation of the Administrative Hearing Examiner attached as Exhibit
"A" and approve the preliminary Planned Unit Development and plat for "Brandywine PUD"
(File No. BP04-00404) subject to the proposed conditions contained in Exhibit "A."
SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force
immediately upon its passage.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this _
day of
,2005.
DAREN NYGREN, Council President
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ATTEST:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney
P AULA JOHNSTON, City Clerk
1
Preliminary Brandywine PUD and Plat Approval
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
FOR THE CITY OF BREMERTON
In the Matter of the Application of
NO. BP04-00404
Jerry Clark
The Brandywine Co.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Brandywine PUD
For Approval of a Subdivision and
Planned Unit Development
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDA nON
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
The Hearing Examiner recommends to the BremertonCity Council that the request for approval
of a Preliminary Plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD) to subdivide 9.45 acres ofland into
70 individual lots for detached single-family residential development, three open space tracts, a
tot lot, a covered spOlis court, and guest parking, to be located on the east side of Pine Road,
approximately 200 feet south of Roswell Road, be GRANTED, with conditions.
SUMMARY OF RECORD
Request
Jerry Clark of The Brandywine Co. (Applicant) requests approval of a Preliminary Plat and a
PUD to subdivide 9.45 acres ofland into 70 individual lots for detached single-family residential
development, three open space tracts, a tot lot, a covered sports court, and guest parking. The
development would be located on the east side of Pine Road, approximately 200 feet south of
Roswell Road.
Hearing Date
The Hearing Examiner for the City of Bremerton held an open record hearing on the matter on
June 13,2005.
Testimonv
The following individuals presented testimony under oath at the open record hearing:
1. Mr. Robert Gnllnbach, City of Bremerton Planner
2. William Palmer, Applicant Representative
3. Paul Wandling, City of Bremerton Public V\Torks
4. Robert Farmer
5. Deborah Marangi
6. Saundra Dominguez
Exhibits
The following exhibits were admitted into the record at the open record hearing:
1. Department of Community Development Staff Report, with the following attachments:
Findings, Conclusions. and RecOInmendafiol1
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 1 0[17
EXHIBIT A
a. Application
b. SEP A Determination of Non-Significance
c. Comprehensive Plan Map
d. Ordinance 4922 Annexation
e. History of Application Correspondence
f. Residential Structure Drawings
g. Neighborhood Meeting
h. Bald Eagle Nest Determination
1. Traffic Study
J. Water and Sewer availability letter
k. Preliminary storm drainage report
1. City Comments
m. State and local agency comments
n. Public Comments
o. Legal Notices
2. PUD Site Plan and Landscaping Plan
3. Preliminary Roadway and Drainage Plan
4. The City's PowerPoint Presentation Slides
Upon consideration of the testimony and exhibits admitted at the open record hearing, the
Hearing Examiner enters the following Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation:
FINDINGS
1. The Applicant requests approval of a Preliminary Plat and a PUD to subdivide 9.45 acres of
land into 70 individual lots for detached single-family residential development, three open
space tracts, a tot lot, a covered sports court, and guest parking. The subject property
consists of three parcels located on the east side of Pine Road, approximately 200 feet south
of Roswell Road.' Exhibit 1. StqflReport. page 1 :Exhibit 1, Attachment a. Application.
2. The vacant subject property is relatively Hat and densely vegetated with trees, including
several significant trees at least two feet in diameter, shrubs, and grasses. There are no
critical areas identified on site. Exhibit 4, Slide 3: Exhibit 1. pages 1-2. Most of the
perimeter of the site is fenced. The site issurrounded with single-family residential uses. To
the south, the residential development includes a manufactured home park. Between the site
and the manufactured home park is a 30-foot wide City utility easement. Exhibit 1. page 2:
Exhibit 4. Slides 4 - 7: Exhibit 1. Attachment a. Application: Testimony of Mr. Palmer.
3. The City of Bremelion updated its Comprehensive Plan in December 2004 by Ordinance
4917. The Comprehensive Plan goals and policies applicable to the proposal include the
following:
I The subject property is known as tax parcel numbers 3962-000-018-0000, 3962-000-019-0009, and 3962-000-020-
0006. Exhibit /. page /. The full legal description of the site is found on page 2 of the City's Staff Report.
Findings. Conclusions. and Recollllnendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 2 of 17
Land Use Element
. Goal LUI: "Identify and enhance distinctive neighborhoods, communities, and
Centers throughout the City."
Policy LUIK: "Promote neighborhoods whichfoster interaction among residents,
contribute to well-being of citizemJJ, and create and sustain a sense of community
and personal safety."
. Goal LU3: "Create an environment that will promote growth."
Policy LU3E: "Provide development incentives andflexibility within the Zoning Code to
encourage desirable design elements lvithflexibilities 'within the Zoning Code provisions
fhr all new development and redevelopment. "
Housing Element
. Goal: H3: "Provide a variety of housing types and densities to meet changing needs of
Bremerton residents."
Policy H3C: "Stimulate the production! new housingfor all incomes, ages. andfamily
~ypes. "
. Goal.~H<?: "Build strong, cohesive neighborhoods with a majority of Bremerton
households owning their own homes."
Policy H6A: "Increase the opportUnities for home ownership within the City of
Bremerton. "
. Goal: H7: "Promote safe, attractive, livable neighborhoods that will attract
homeowners. ,.
. Goal: H8: "Promote social interaction as well as neighborhood identity and initiatives."
Policy H8C: "Encourage walk-ability 'within neighborhoods. ,"
Transportation Element
. Goal: TR5: "Recognize the importance of easily accessible, attractive and well dispersed
parking as a valuable community asset."
Policy TR5A: "Implement parking ratios that reflect the least amount of spaces required
for development approval. vl'here transportation options other than the automobile are
available to serve travel needs. "
Policy TR5B: "Require landscaping along the edge of parking areas to reduce visual
impact and aid infiltration o.lrunoff
Findings. Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brand.-vwine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 3 of 17
City Services Element
. Goal: CS6: "Ensure adequate funding for public facilities and services for existing
development and new growth."
Policy CS6D: "Recognize responsibility o/the development community in providingfor
the impacts of nel1' grmvth. "
. Goal: CS 15: "Enhance and enforce standards for infrastructure and utilities. especially in
residential areas."
Policy CS l5A: "Ernphasize conformity o.ldesign within sub-areas of the City, especially
neighborhoods."
. Improve sidevvalks throughout the City, especially accessibility features.
· Goal: CS16: "Promote open spaces and 'green spaces' for everyone's enjoyment."
Policy CS 16A: "Realize recreational needs in open space planning."
4. The City received the application. originally a subdivision only, on October 20, 2004. The
City notified the Applicant that the northern two-thirds of the site would have to be annexed
prior to processing of the application. The southern one-third of the subject property had a
zoning designation of Medium Density Residential (MF), which allows a density of eight to
18 units per acre. The City Council annexed the northern 6.14 acres of the subject property
by Ordinance 4922, effective January 10.2005. Upon annexation, the Comprehensive Plan
designation for the annexed portion of the site was Low Density Residential and the zoning
designation was Residential- Low Density (SF - 3). The Applicant's original proposal was
not consistent with the zoning designation of the annexed area. The Applicant revised the
proposal and submitted an application for Planned Unit Development on February 9, 2005.
Both applications were processed and finally deemed complete on April2L 2005. Exhibit 1,
page 5; Exhibit 1, Attachment c, Comprehensive Plan map: Testimony of Mr. Grumbach.
5. The intent of the SF - 3 zoning district is to provide areas of single-family housing of up to
eight units per acre in urban subdivisions. The smaller lot sizes of this zone are intended to
enhance affordability. The intent of the MF zoning district is provide multiple unit dwellings
at the medium density level of eight to 18 units per acre. The housing types allowed in the
MF district include clustered single-family detached units, garden and larger apartments,
condominiums, and associated accessory uses. Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC)
21.02.120.
6. PUDs allow flexibility in development standards, such as lot sizes and setbacks, to promote
the efficient use of land and to allow variety and diversity in available housing and to
preserve open spaces. BAle 21.02.340. Through the PUDprocess, exceptions to the lot
requirements of the underlying zoning district, including modifications to lot size, setbacks,
height and other similar requirements may be granted. An approved PUD creates a limitation
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD, No. BP04-00404
page 4 of 17
on the use and design of the site to only those uses, designs and standards that are specifically
included in the PUD. Such limitations shall remain in effect until the PUD is constructed, or
until its approval expires in which case the previous zoning automatically returns. BMC
21.02.460.
7. In Bremerton, a PUD may be developed with any use that is allowed in the underlying
zoning district. There may be a composite of two or more zoning districts within a PUD.
Allowable uses, including buildings, lots, accessory structures, ofT-street parking areas, and
open space may be located without reference to boundaries of the underlying zoning district
in accordance with an approved site plan. BMC 21.02.470 (a) and (b).
8. Allowed density within PUDs is determined by the amount of open space provided by the
project. PUDs in the SF - 3 district that provide 15% of site area as open space are allowed a
maximum density of eight units per acre. PUDs in the MF district with 15% open space are
allowed a maximum density of 18 units per acre. BMC 21.02.470(e). The maximum
permitted density within the proposed PUD would be 109 units? The Applicant proposes 70
units, which is a density of 7.4 units per acre. The proposed density is consistent with both
underlying zoning districts. Eyhibit 1, page 6: Testimony of Mr. Grumbach.
9. Bremerton does not require specific dimensional standards for lots within a PUD. The
proposed lots range from 3,120 to 4,410 square feet. Structures will cover an average of 54
to 60 percent of residential lot area. In Bremerton, lots are required to have 20 feet of
frontage on a street. BMC 21.02.070. The majority of the proposed lots have 40 to 54 feet
of frontage. Lots 44 and 45 have only ten feet of fi'ontage, and Lots 46 and 47 have 15 and
seven feet of frontage respectively. The reduced frontage is allowed under the PUDs flexible
design process. Community Development staff testified that the proposed lot dimensions and
street frontages are acceptable under the PUD process. Exhibit 2. Site Plan: Exhibit 4, Slide
9; Testimony of Mr. Grumbach: Eyhibit 1. page 12.
10. The conceptual drawings submitted by the Applicant to depict anticipated building
appearance show three different facades, each with varied gabled roof lines and garage
presentations. The proposed designs are similar in appearance to existing single-family
development in the area. Exhibit 4. Slide 10: Testimony of Mr. Grumbach: Exhibit 1,
Attachment/,' Conceptual Drawings.
11. Units within PUDs are required to maintain a setback from the exterior perimeter of the
project. For buildings that are 26-35 feet tall, structures must be set back 25 feet from the
front lot line, and 15 feet from the rear and side lot lines. The side and rear setbacks may be
reduced to ten feet if the structure height is limited to 25 feet. BMC 21.02.490.
26.14 acres at 8 units per acre = 49.12. 3.31 acres at 18 units per acre = 59.58. Total units allowed = 108.7. The
BMC allows fractions ending in .66 or greater to be rounded up. BMC 21. 02.260.
Findings. Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD, No. BP04-00404
page 5 of 17
12. Building heights are measured from the highest adjoining sidewalk or ground surface. BMC
21.02.220. While the residential structure height proposed on the application is 35 feet, the
structures proposed on the site plan would measure 26 feet from the highest adjoining
sidewalk or ground surface to the tallest point on the structure. Thus, the proposed
residences are 26 feet tall for the purposes of calculating height under the zoning code.
Exhibit 1. page 7: Testimony of A1r. Grlllnbacli: Exhibit 1. Attachment a, Application.
13. Non-perimeter structure heights in the SF-3 district are limited to 30 feet and in the MF
district are limited to 40 feet. BMC 21.02.130. The proposed 26-foot heights of the
residential structures would be consistent with these standards. No height is specified for the
proposed sports court building, a maximum height of 40-feet, consistent with the MF district,
would be compatible with other uses in the vicinity, given the facility's central location
within the development. Exhibit 1. page 8: Testimony of Mr. Grumbach.
14. Per the proposed site plan, Lots 5 through 19,45,46,54, and 64 would comply with the
perimeter setbacks if the height on those portions of the structures within the 15-foot setback
is limited to 25 feet. Exhibit I. page 7: BMC 21.02.490(b)(3). A condition of approval is
necessary to ensure that Lots 5 through 19,45,46,54, and 64 comply with the perimeter
setback height limitations. Testimony of Mr. Grumbach: E:rhibit 1. page 7.
15. All streets and parking areas shall contribute to the overall aesthetic design of the PUD, while
minimizing traffic congestion and the amount of impervious surface area. BMC
21.02.490(e)(4). The proposed street grid would provide an orderly and attractive design and
promote efficient traffic pattems. The Applicant has proposed reduced garage setbacks for
the purpose of reducing driveway surface, minimizing impervious surface area. Community
Development stafftestified that the proposed structure design would be an attractive addition
to the existing neighborhood. Exhibit 1. pages J 5. 19.
16. PUDs must set aside a minimum of 15% of the total site area as common open space. At
least two-thirds of the common open space must be suitable for active recreational purposes.
The required open space may be reduced by no more than twenty-five percent (25%) if the
project includes a recreational building, swimming pool, or similar facility that will better
address the recreational needs of the residents without significantly detracting from the
project's appearance or environmental quality. BMC 2J.02.490(d).
17. At 9.45 acres, the proposed PUD is required to set aside 1.41 acres of common open space.
The Applicant proposes to provide a tot lot and an enclosed spot1s court building in Tract A.
The Community Development Director determined that the proposed amenities qualify the
project for a 25% reduction in common open space area. Therefore, the total required open
space area would be 1.07 acres. The Applicant proposes a total of 1.36 acres of common
open space, exceeding the amount required. All of the open space proposed is suitable for
active recreational use. Exhibit 1, pages 8 - 9: Exhibit 2, Site Plan: Testimony of Mr.
Grumbach.
Findings. Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremer ton Hearing l:-xaminer
Brandywine PUD, No. BP04-00404
page 6 of 17
18. PUDs are required to retain or install one street tree per every 25 lineal feet of property street
frontage. BMC 21.02. 700(a)(l)(iii). The subject property has 617 feet of frontage on Pine
Road, requiring a total of 25 street trees. The Applicant has proposed 14 street trees. A
condition of approval is necessary to ensure that the street tree requirements are satisfied.
Exhibit 2, Landscape Plan: Exhibit 1, page 10: Testimony of Mr. Grumbach.
19. PUDs are required to retain existing natural vegetation to "the greatest extent possible."
BMC 21. 02. 340(c). The Applicant proposes to retain 32 significant trees at least two feet in
diameter within the project indicated on the plat map, and additional existing vegetation
along the north and east boundaries. The Applicant noted that retention of significant trees
presents a marketing advantage. Community Development staff testified that the proposed
retained vegetation satisfies the code's requirement. Exhibit 1. page 10: Exhibit 2,
Landscape Plan: Testimony of ~Mr. Grumbach: Testimony of Mr. Palmer.
20. The project would be connected to the City's water and sewer utilities. The City's public
water and sewer service have capacity to serve the project. Existing water and sewer mains
would be extended to and through the site to each lot. Exhibit 1, Attachmentj.
21. The Applicant proposes to collect and direct storm water runoff from roads, houses, and
driveways through curbs and gutters and underground conveyance to a detention and
treatment pond located along the site's southern boundary in Tract E. An erosion control
plan conforming to City of Bremerton Drainage Manual and the Stormwater Management
Manual for the Puget Sound Basin utilizing best management practices for removal of
sediment and other contaminants would be required. Exhibit 2, Site Plan; Exhibit 1,
Attachment k.
22. The site takes access by a single entrance on Pine Road, which is classified as a Collector
Arterial. The three-lane access point will promote efficient circulation and traffic safety by
reducing congestion. When completely built out, Pine Road will have a 75-foot right-of-
way. Required ti"ontage improvements for the project would include a five-foot sidewalk, a
six-foot planter strip, curb & gutter, a five-foot wide bike lane, 12-foot wide travel lanes, and
other improvements. A 7.5-foot public easement along the site's frontage would be recorded
and would contain the required sidewalk and utilities along Pine Road. Exhibit 2. Site Plan:
Exhibit I, page 13. The required frontage improvements must be installed or bonded prior to
final plat approval. The Applicant would be required to install the sidewalk along the Pine
Road frontage prior to any building permit issuance. Testimony o.fMr. Grumbach.
23. The lots would take access from a new private internal road system, which would be
maintained by the lot owners. The proposed internal road was designed to Local Access Two
Way street standards, including sidewalks on both sides, an eight-foot wide on-street parking
lane on one side, two travel lanes ten-feet wide each, curb & gutter on both sides, and a five-
foot utility easement on both sides. The requirement for a planter strip was administratively
waived. The City Engineer approved the proposed road design. Exhibit 1, pages 14 - 15:
Exhibit 1, Attachment l,jVJay 19, 2005 letterfrom Public Works.
Findings, Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-0040-l
page 7 of 17
24. Lots 44 and 45 are accessed by a Shared Driveway Access located between Lot 20 and the
east plat boundary. Standards for Shared Driveway Access require two nine-foot wide lanes.
The Applicant's proposed I5-foot wide road with a five-foot sidewalk does not satisfy the
standards for a Shared Driveway Access. A condition of approval is necessary to ensure the
site plan is revised to bring the proposed access into compliance with required standards.
Exhibit 1, page 14: Testimony of lvir. Grumbach
25. The portion of the internal Local Access road providing access to Lots 46, 47, and 50 - 58
has a dead end. The length of the road from the intersection to Lots 50-58 is approximately
170 feet, and the length to Lots 46-47 is approximately 285 feet. The City's Engineering
standards require a hammerhead turnaround for dead ends roads that are 150 to 200 feet in
length and cul-de-sacs for dead ends roads greater than 200 feet long. The City Engineer
approved a deviation from these standards and approved the proposed hammerhead
turnaround serving all of the lots in question. Exhibit 1. page 14: Testimony of Mr.
Grumbach.
26. Vehicle maneuvering areas other than access driveways are not allowed to be located in the
perimeter setback of PUDs that are within or abutting residential districts. BMC
21. 02. 490(e)(5). Portions of the road end adjacent to Lot 19 and the hammerhead turnaround
adjacent to Lot 54 are proposed to be located within the perimeter setback. A condition of
approval is necessary to ensure that the Applicant revises the road system to comply with
perimeter setback requirements. Exhibit 1. page 14: Testimony oIMr. Grumbach.
27. The proposed internal road system was reviewed and approved by the Fire Marshall. Exhibit
1, page 14; Exhibit L Attachment 1. The Applicant would be required to install fire hydrants
consistent with the International Fire Code so that there is no pOliion of any structure on-site
that is greater than 300-feet from a hydrant. Exhibit 1. page 16.
28. Street signs and street lighting must be installed consistent with City standards. The final
lighting plan and street signage must be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer.
Exhibit 1. page 16.
29. The Applicant submitted a traffic impact analysis prepared by Heath & Associates in
September 2004. Currently, fairly heavy evening peak hour traffic volumes exist on
Wheaton Way. Pedestrian and bicycle traffic in the vicinity is generally "mild." The study
projected that the PUD would generate an average weekday volume of 749 new vehicle trips,
including 78 PM peak hour trips. This increase in traffic volume is characterized by the
traffic study as a "moderate" increase and is not anticipated to create major increases in delay
for the key intersection approaches. The most significant impacts are expected at the
intersection of Pine Road and Sylvan Avenue, which is projected to go from a Level of
Service (LOS) B to LOS C. Bremelion does not have a concurrency ordinance that would
require mitigation of such impacts. No off-site mitigation is proposed. Eyhibit 1. page 13:
Exhibit 1. Attachment i.
Findings. Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 8 of 17
30. Off-street parking must be provided at a rate of two spaces per lot. BA1C 21. 02. 670(a). The
Applicant has proposed two off-street parking spaces per unit. Exhibit I, page 12. The
Applicant proposes an additional 34 on-street guest parking spaces on the internal road that
are designed to slow traffic yet not interfere with pedestrian circulation. Exhibit 2.. Site Plan:
Exhibit I,page 15.
31. No parking or maneuvering areas, other than access driveways, are allowed within a PUD
perimeter setback when the development is within or abutting any residential zoning district.
BMC 21. 02. 490(e)(5). The two parking spaces located between Lots 63 and 64 and the three
parking spaces located between Lots 4 and 5 must be removed from or relocated on the site
plan. Community Development staff requested a condition of approval requiring the
Applicant to revise the site plan to so that no guest parking spaces is provided within the
perimeter setback. Exhibit 1. page 12: Testimony of Mr. Grumbach. The Applicant objected
to this request. The Applicant argued that the proposed guest parking spaces within the
perimeter setback between Lots 4 and 5 do not abut a residential district, but rather a public
street and need not be removed to comply with the code. Testimony of Mr. Palmer.
Community Development staff requested an interpretation of the code provision found at
BMC 21.02. 490(e)(5), which is addressed in the Conclusions below.
32. A pedestrian circulation system must be designed to assure that pedestrians can move safely
and conveniently both on the site and between the site and nearby properties and activities, as
appropriate. BMC 21. 02. 490(e)(3). The Applicant proposes to provide for pedestrian
circulation by providing the internal road system with sidewalks that connect to public
sidewalks on Pine Road. Utility easements adjacent to the site could also provide pedestrian
circulation, but are not proposed for such by the Applicant. Some neighbors have expressed
concerns about pedestrian use of the utility corridor, and this proposed plat does not propose
that but merely makes the option available should the City Council decide to open utility
corridors to pedestrian access in the future. Exhibit 2, Site Plan; Exhibit 1, page 15;
Testimon,y of .Mr. Palmer.
33. The PUD would be served by public transit service on Pine Road by Kitsap Transit Routes
17 and 23. There is a bus stop on Pine Road along the property frontage. Exhibit 1, page 13.
34. The City of Bremerton Department of Community Development submitted the proposal to
other City departments, as well as appropriate state and county agencies, for review and
comment. The Department of Public Works & Utilities submitted extensive comments dated
May 19, 2005, addressing road improvements; stormwater plans; water and sewer
availability; and street lighting. The recommendations of the Public Works staff and other
City review agencies were incorporated into the recommended conditions of approval.
Exhibit I,Attachment 1: Testimony of Mr. Grumbach. Kitsap County Health District
submitted comments concerning the types of soils the Applicant would use for fill material.
The Washington State Department of Natural Resources noted that a Forest Practices
Application would be required. Exhibit 1. Attachment m.
Findings, Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD, No. BP04-00404
page 9 of 17
35. School aged children would be bussed to area schools. The entrance to the plat provides
adequate space for a safe and convenient bus stop location. The City submitted the
application materials to the Bremerton School District for review and comment. The District
did not comment on the proposa1.3 The Applicant is encouraged to contact the School District
to develop an appropriate location and specifications for a school bus stop to serve the
children of the plat. Exhibit 1, page 13: Testiniony of All'. Palmer: Testimony of Mr.
Grumbach.
36. The City received two public comment letters before the hearing. The letters addressed
public concerns regarding the following: possible retention of a green belt or other
improvements between the project and Hanford A venue; possible fence around the PUD;
increased traffic; guest parking, noise~ and runoff. Exhibit 1, Attachment n.
37. The City of Bremerton was designated lead agency for review of environmental impacts
caused by the proposal. The City considered an environmental checklist and the
requirements of City ordinances prior to issuance of its threshold determination. The City
Responsible Official determined that project would not have probable significant adverse
environmental impacts and issued a Determination of NOll-Significance (DNS) on May 26,
2005.4 No appeal was filed. Exhibit 1, Attachment b. SEPA DNS.
38. Adequate notice of the public hearing and the SEPA DNS were mailed to neighboring land
owners, posted, and published in The Sun in accordance with City of Bremerton notice
requirements (BMC 21.02.895). Exhibit I, Attachment 0, Legal Notice Afjidavits. Public
comment at the public hearing expressed concern about traffic impacts on Pine Road, the
need for a school bus stop location, pedestrian circulation, traffic impacts on Hanford
A venue, potential critical areas on site, the need for significant tree retention, and potential
access from the project to Hanford A venue. Testimony of Ai/I'. Farmer; Testimony of Ms.
Marangi: Testimony of Ms. Dominguez.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction
Pursuant to Sections 2.13.070,2.13.080 and 21.02.855 of the Bremerton Municipal Code
(BMC), the Hearing Examiner of the City of Bremerton has jurisdiction to hold open record pre-
decision Hearing on Preliminary Plat and PUD applications and recommend action to the City
Counci1. The recommendation may be to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
application. BAle 2.13.110.
3 Because the School District did not submit any comments on the application for 70 residential lots, it is assumed
the District has no concems about capacity of its facilities to handle the anticipated new students, nor about safe
walking conditions to and from schools or bus stops.
4 The DNS contains seven conditions of approval; however, Community Development staff testified that it is not a
mitigated determination of non-significance in that the are "courtesy" or "notice" conditions. They do not directly
address impacts anticipated specifically from the proposed development, but rather are included to ensure the
Applicant is aware of requirements that remain in effect despite a threshold detennination of non-significance.
Testimony of Mr. Grumhach.
Findings, Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremer/on Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 10 of 17
Criteria for Review - Preliminary Plat
The criteria for approval of a Preliminary Plat are found in Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of
Washington.5 Pursuant to RCW 58.17.110(2). a Preliminary Plat application may not be
approved unless:
(a) appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and
for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways,
transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation,
playgrounds, schools and schoolgrounds and all other relevant facts, including
sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for
students who only walk to and from school; and
(b) the public use and interest will be served by the platting of such subdivision and
dedication.
Criteria for Review - Planned Unit Development
BMC Section 21.02.480 requires a PUD to conform to the following general criteria:
(a) The location, design, and uses of the PUD shall be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, Bremerton Shoreline Management Program, and with other
applicable plans and ordinances adopted by the City.
(b) The PUD shall be integrated with its surroundings and designed to harmonize
with existing or proposed development in the neighborhood. In the case of a
departure in character from the surrounding land uses, the scale, intensity and
design shall adequately reduce the impact of the development in such a way that
the project will not be detrimental to the neighborhood.
(c) The traffic generated by the PUD shall be accommodated safely and within the
adopted Levels of Service for affected streets.
(d) All development will be adequately served by existing or planned facilities and
serVIces.
(e) The PUD will result in an attractive, healthful, efficient and stable environment
for living, shopping, working, and leisure activities.
(f) The development plan shall make adequate and appropriate provision for the
preservation of the environment, both natural and man-made, and the
conservation of energy.
5 As of the date of this application, the City had not enacted a subdivision ordinance. Testimony of Mr. Grmnbach.
Findings. Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 11 of 17
Conclusions Based on Findings
The conclusions below address: (l) the request to review the parking plan proposed by the
Applicant and (2) the consistency of the plat with the criteria for approval established by the
Washington Legislature in Chapter 58.17 of the Revised Code of Washington and (3) the
consistency of the PUD with the criteria for approval established by the City Council in Chapter
21.02 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. .
1. Resvonse to Request for Code Intervretation
The Hearing Examiner was asked to interpret the provisions concerning parking spaces within a
PUD perimeter setback found at BMC 21.02.490( e)( 5), which states:
No parking or maneuvering areas, other than access driveways, shall be allowed
within the PUD's perimeter setbacks when the development is within or abutting
any residential zoning district.
The Applicant argues that the three parking spaces within the perimeter setback between Lots 4
and 5 need not be eliminated because the spaces do not abut a residential district.
The rules of statutory construction used by courts apply to municipal ordinances. When an
ordinance is unambiguous, construction is not necessary and the plain meaning controls. When
the ordinance is ambiguous, the agency's interpretation is accorded great deference in
determining legislative intent. Absent ambiguity there is no need for the agency's expertise.
Faben Point Neighbors v. City o.lMercer Island. 102 Wash.App. 775, 778 (2000). The "agency"
in this case is the City Community Development Department.
In the present case, the language of the ordinance is not ambiguous and does not need to be
interpreted. The plain language ofBMC 21.02.490(e)(5) indicates that the location of the
development as a whole, rather than the location of the contested parking spaces, is examined to
determine whether parking may be provided within the perimeter setback. The subject property
is within a residential district and surrounded on all sides by residential zoning. The five guest
parking spaces within the perimeter setback must be removed or relocated within the site plan.
Because there is no guest parking requirement, the change does not otherwise impact the
application. The Applicant must submit a revised site plan that shows no parking within the
perimeter setback. It may be that some residents begin park in these areas, but they may not be
officially designated as parking spaces.
2. Preliminarv Plat
1. With conditions, appropriate provision will be made for the public health, safety and
general welfare and for all other relevant facts. Water and sewer service will be made
available to each lot. The Applicant will preserve existing vegetation to the greatest extent
possible, including the retention of at least 32 significant trees and other existing vegetation
along the site's north and east boundaries. As conditioned, the proposed structures comply
with all applicable zoning and PUD requirements for dimension. Conditions of approval will
ensure that no portion of any structure within the perimeter setback exceeds 25-feet in height.
The project will generate moderate traffic and will not significantly impact the SlllTOllnding
Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 12 of 17
transp0l1ation system. The City conducted environmental review of the proposal and
determined that, with conditions, it would not result in significant adverse environmental
impacts. Conditions of approval will ensure that frontage improvements are installed; that
the internal private road is designed and built consistent with City road standards; that the
access point is designed to avoid congestion by providing one ingress and two egress lanes;
and that the concerns of the public works depadment are addressed. The School District did
not submit comments indicating the development would have adverse impacts on schools and
no mitigation is required for school impacts. No mitigation beyond bringing the property's
frontage on Pine Road up to City standards is required for the anticipated minimal traffic
impacts. The public use and interest will be served by the creation of 70 single-family
detached residences with ample open space and recreational facilities. Findings of Fact Nos.
2,4.8-14.16-18.20--27. 29. 31.32.33-35. and 37.
3. Planned Unit Development
1. As conditioned, the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Clustered low-
density residential development that preserves significant open space is consistent with
several goals and policies ofthe Comprehensive Plan. The project will provide affordable
housing opportunities. The central recreational spaces and facilities will promote a sense of
community and interaction between neighbors. The proposed development appears
consistent with Bremerton's desire to continue to be a "most livable city". Findings of Facts
Nos. 3 and 4.
2. The proposed pun will be integrated with its surroundings and designed to harmonize
with existing development in the neighborhood. The PUD will be consistent with single-
family residential development in the area. Conditions of approval will ensure the perimeter
setback is provided as required by the code, specifically regarding structure height abutting
adjacent residential development. The design of the open space and recreational areas in the
central area of the plat will ensure that the enclosed sports court does not have negative
impacts on existing development in the area. Findings (?f Facts Nos. 2. 4 - 6. 11. 14 -18. 21,
27. 31. and 32.
3. The traffic generated by the PUD can be accommodated safely and within the adopted
Levels of Service for affected streets. The proposed design of the plat entrance and the
internal road network will provide safe travel conditions within the site. The project will
generate only moderate traffic volume increases, which can be safely accommodated on the
existing transportation system surrounding the project. The LOS at the most impacted
intersection of Pine Road and S ylvan Avenue will not experience significant increase in
delay. Findings of Facts Nos. 22 - 27 and 29.
4. The proposed development will be adequately served by existing or planned facilities
and services. The subject prope11y will connect to City of Bremerton sewer and water,
which systems have the capacity to serve the project. Finding of Fact No. 20.
5. The pun will result in an attractive, healthful, efficient, and stable environment for
living, shopping, working, and leisure activities. The PUD will provide active recreational
Findings. Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine pun. No. BP04-0040-l
page 13 of 17
opportunities for all ages of residents. The common open space areas will encourage
interaction amongst neighbors and promote a sense of community. No adverse
environmental impacts will result from the project. Two public transit routes serve the site
with a convenient bus stop location along the propeliy frontage on Pine Road. Findings of
Facts Nos. 8 - 10. 15, 17. 18. 23. 27. and 32.
6. The development plan will make adequate and appropriate provision for the
preservation of the environment, both natural and man-made, and the conservation of
energy. Through retaining at least 32 significant trees and additional existing vegetation
along the site's northern and eastern boundaries, as well as through thoughtful creation of
landscaped common park areas, the project will provide adequate open space. The City
determined the project would not result in probable significant adverse environmental
impacts and issued a DNS. Findings of Facts Nos. 2. 8.17.18.21.34, and 37.
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the preceding Findings and Conclusions, the Hearing Examiner recommends
approval of a PreliminaIY Plat and PUD to subdivide 9.45 acres into 70 residential lots as
described in the application (Exhibit 1, Attachment a. Application. and Exhibit 2, Site Plan),
subject to the following conditions:
1. The PUD shall constitute a limitation on the use and design ofthe site to those uses, designs,
and standards that are specifically included in the PUD. Such limitation shall remain in
effect until the PUD is constructed or until the prelimii1ary approval expires, in which case
the previous zoning automatically returns.
2. Final plans for the tot lot and the covered sports court with barbequing facility shall be
provided to the City and approved by the Director. The tot lot and covered sports court with
barbequing facility shall be installed or bonded prior to final plat approval.
3. Lots 5 through 19,45,46, 54, and 64 shall be restricted to the maximum building height of
25 feet as measured by BMC Section 21.02.220. The height of structures on these lots may
be increased to 30 feet for those portions of a structure that are setback 15 feet or more from
the PUD perimeter setback line. This height restriction shall be recorded on the face of the
final plat.
4. One street tree per twenty-five (25) lineal feet of street frontage shall be provided along Pine
Road. The Applicant shall submit a revised landscaping for review and approval by the
Community Development Director prior to final plat approval.
5. The Applicant shall retain existing vegetation to the greatest extent possible. No fewer than
32 significant trees at least 24 inches in diameter shall be retained. The Director may approve
minor modifications to the landscape plan if found necessary to allow for suitable
development.
Findings. Conclusions, and RecOlnmendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 14 of 17
6. The required landscaping along Pine Road shall be installed or bonded prior to final plat
approval. The remaining landscaping may be provided as the site is developed, but must be
installed before building occupancy permits are issued.
7. An open space guarantee that ensures the retention of and provides for permanent
maintenance of the open space is required per BMC Section 21.02.510 prior to final plat
approval. The language of the open space guarantee shall be approved by the City and
shown on the face of the final plat.
8. The Applicant shall submit a copy of the Washington Department of Natural Resources
approval of a Forest Practice IV - General application to the Department of Community
Development prior to any clearing activities on site.
9. A minimum of two off-street parking spaces per each dwelling unit shall be provided. This
condition shall be indicated on the face of the final plat.
10. Addresses for the individual lots shall be obtained from the Public Works department and
shall be indicated on the final plat.
11. Street frontage improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and street lighting are required
along Pine Road prior to final plat approval. Frontage improvements shall meet City
engineering requirements for a Collector Arterial, BMC Title 11 and the City Engineer's
comments.
12. Frontage improvements along Pine Road shall be installed or bonded for prior to final plat
approval. The sidewalk along the Pine Road frontage shall be installed prior to building
permit issuance. Right-of-way Permits from the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County Public
Works Departments shall be approved prior to beginning construction.
13. The Applicant shall provide a 7.5-foot wide public easement for sidewalks and utilities
adjacent to Pine Road. The easement shall be recorded on the face of the final plat.
Language for the easement shall be approved by the City Public Works Department.
14. Private streets within the PUD shall be developed according to City engineering standards for
Local Access Streets, BMC Title 11 and the City Engineer's comments. The requirement for
a planter strip along the internal plat road is waived. All street, curb, gutter, and sidewalk
improvements shall be installed or bonded for prior to final plat approval.
15. The Applicant shall submit revised site plans that exclude all parking and vehicle
maneuvering areas from the required perimeter setback. The three guest parking spaces
located between Lots 4 and 5 and the two guest parking spaces located between Lots 63 and
64 shall be removed or relocated on the site plan outside of the perimeter setback. The
portions of the road end adjacent to Lot 19 and the hammerhead turnaround adjacent to Lot
54 shall likewise be removed from the perimeter setback. The final street plan shall be
revised so that the Shared Driveway Access to Lots 44 and 45 shall be at least 20 feet wide.
Findings, Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 15 of 17
The City Engineer and the Community Development Director shall approve the revised street
plans prior to final plat approval.
16. Streets within the PUD shall be identified by street signs, which shall be installed or bonded
for prior to final plat approval. All street signs shall meet City standards as provided for in
Engineer Standards 3251 through 3300. -
17. Street lighting consistent with the requirements of Title 11 of the Bremerton Municipal Code
shall be provided along the PUD's interior private road system. The Applicant shall submit a
final street lighting plan for review and approval by the City Engineer. Street lighting shall
be installed or bonded for prior to final plat approval.
18. The Applicant shall submit a final storm drainage plan for review and approval by the City
Engineer. The plan shall contain temporary erosion control measures consistent with the
City of Bremerton Drainage Manual and the Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget
Sound Basin. All offsite storm water conveyance facilities shall be part of the public storm
system and shall require a minimum 20-foot wide easement. The easement shall be shown
on the face of the final plat. Storm drainage facilities shall be installed or bonded for prior to
final plat approval.
19. Maintenance agreements for the street and storm drainage systems shall be recorded prior to
final plat approval. Language for the agreement shall be approved by the City Engineer and
recorded in a separate document or on the face of the final plat.
20. Water and sewer improvements shall be provided per the Conditional Water and Sewer
Availability letter. Water and sewer mains shall be extended through the development to
provide services to individual lots. All sewer and water improvements shall meet
Department of Utilities Development and Construction Standards, APW A/DOT
Specifications, A WW A Standards, and Title 15 of the Bremerton Municipal Code. All water
and sewer improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and shall be
installed or bonded for prior to final plat approval.
21. Fire hydrants with flows meeting International Fire Codes Appendix B & C shall be installed
or bonded for prior to final plat approval. Location of the fire hydrants shall meet
International Fire Code requirements and the Fire Marshall's comments. Ifbonding is used,
the fire hydrants shall be installed prior to any construction above the foundation.
22. All conditions set forth in the May 26,2005 Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) shall
be included as conditions of final plat approval.
23. The Applicant shall pay in full all fees charged for the public hearing prior to the issuance of
any permits for clearing or construction on the site and the submission of the final plat.
24. A final PUD and plat meeting RCW 58.17.160 (requirements for recording a plat), WAC
332-130 (minimum standards for recording a plat), applicable development standards and
Findings. Conclusions, and Recommendation
City of Bremer ton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD, No. BPO.:/-00404
page 16 of 17
conditions shall be submitted to the City for approval within two (2) years of the date of
preliminary plat approval pursuant to BMC Section 21.02.520(a).
25. Two copies of the plat certificate shall be submitted with the application for final approval of
the plat and PU D.
26. Six (6) copies of the PUD and plat (not Mylar) shall be submitted to the Department of
Community Development for final compliance review.
27. The Applicant/Developer shall from a Homeowner's Association that will be responsible for
maintenance of common areas such as the private roads, the park area, the covered sport
COlui and other common items.
28. A copy of the recorded PUD and plat shall be provided to the Department of Community
Development before building permits are issued.
29. The Applicant is encouraged to contact the School District to develop an appropriate location
and specifications for a school bus stop.
:1-
Decided this 2~day of June 2005.
C\~~b ,~
Theodore Paul Hunter
Hearing Examiner for the City of Bremerton
Findings. Conclusions. and Recommendation
City of Bremerton Hearing Examiner
Brandywine PUD. No. BP04-00404
page 17 of17
CITY OF BREMERTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
STAFF REPORT, CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS
Hearing Examiner Public Hearing June 13, 2005
Requested Action: Preliminary Planned Unit Development/ plat to divide SF-3 and MF
zoned parcels into 70 lots plus open space and road tracts; and to construct 70 detached
single-family dwellings, a tot lot, a roofed sports court and 18 guest parking spaces on
9.45 acres of land; and to grade approximately 20,000 yards of earth and import another
2,600 yards of material
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Land Use Action (See ApPENDIX A for application):
Hearing Examiner recommendation to the Bremerton City Council on Preliminary
Planned Unit Development and Preliminary Subdivision application
2. File Number: BP04-00404
3. Applicant: Jerry Clark, The Brandywine Co, 5575 Soundview Drive, Suite 104A,
Gig Harbor, W A
4. Location: Eastside of Pine Road, approximately 200 feet south of Roswell Drive
5. Assessor Account Number: 3962-000-018-0000,3962-000-019-0009, and
3962-000-020-0006
PROJECT SUMMARY
1. Current Zone Classification: Residential Low-density (SF - 3) &
Residential Medium-density (MF)
2. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Low Density Residential (LDR)
3. Shoreline Environmental Designation: None
4. Critical Areas Designations: None identified
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (See ApPENDIX B)
SEPA Threshold Determination: Determination of Nonsignificance issued May 26,
2005
BP04-00404
1 of 24
SITE DESCRIPTION
1. Legal Description:
Lot 18
ROBESON'S 1 2 5 ACRE TRACTS
PART OF TRACT 18, ROBESON'S ONE, TWO AND FIVE ACRE TRACTS, AS PER
VOLUME t OF PLATS, PAGE 72, RECORDS OF KITSAP COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS
FOllOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 18; THENCE
NORTH 2055'27' EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF TRACT 18, 95.99 FEET, MORE OR
lESS TO EXISTING FENCE; THENCE SOUTH 85049'08' EAST FOllOWING THE FENCE,
651.69 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF TRACT 18; THENCE FOllOWING THE EAST LINE
OF TRACT 18, SOUTH 3002'33' WEST 59.80 FEET MORE OR lESS, TO THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 18; THENCE FOllOWING THE SOUTH LINE OF
TRACT 18, NORTH 88059'56' WEST 652.46 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
SITUATE IN KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
LOT 019
ROBESON'S 1 2 5 ACRE TRACTS
TRACT 19, ROBESON'S 1,2 AND 5-ACRE TRACTS, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 1 OF
PLATS, PAGE 72, RECORDS OF KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
Lot 20
ROBESON'S 1 2 5 ACRE TRACTS
BlK-OOO lOT-020 D-OO TR 20 EXC THE FOlG DESC PT OF TR 20 PER COURT CAUSE
NO. 34875 l Y S OF THE FOlG DESC IN BEG AT THE 1/4 COR COM TO SECS 1 & 2
TWP 24 RGE 1 E WH PT IS No05TOOE 2655.38 FT FR THE SEC COR COM TO SEC 1 & 2
& 11 & 12 IN SD TWP & RGE TH S89'56'50W 1298.03 FT TO THE SE COR OF SD SW 1/4
NE1/4 & THE TPOB OF TR HERE IN DESC TH N2024'20E AlG THE El Y IN OF SD SW
1/4 NE 1/4 A DIST OF 133.08 FT TH N89'44'45W AlG THE OLD ORIG FENCE IN 1268.05
FT TO PTWH IS 30 FT E OF THEWLY IN OF SD SW 1/4 NE 1/4 TH SLY PLT SD WLY LN
138.11 FT MIL TO THE SLY LN OF THE SD SW 1/4 NE 114 TH N89056'50E ALG SD SLY
IN 1268.05 FT Mil TO THE TPOB
2. Lot Size: Approximately 9.45 acres
3. Surrounding Land Uses:
West
Zoning
Kitsap County (Urban Low)
Residential Medium-density
(MF)
Residential Low-density (SF-
3) & Kitsap County (Urban
Low)
I Kitsap County (Urban Low)
Activity
Single-family residential
Manufactured home park and single-
family residential
Single-family residential &
undeveloped land
Direction
North
South
East
Single-family residential'
4. Topography: The site is relatively flat containing a variety of trees and heavy
vegetation. The predominate trees are Douglas firs and big leaf maples with lesser
amounts of west em red cedar, pine and Indian plum.
BP04-00404
2 of24
5. Development: The lots are undeveloped.
6. Access: The ingress/ egress are provided from Pine Road.
7. Utilities: The site is served by public water and sanitary sewer services.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (See APPENDIX C)
The City Council approved Ordinance 4917 adopting an updated Comprehensive Plan
effective December 17, 2004. The following goals and policies are applicable to
subdivisions and Planned Unit Developments.
Land Use Element
GOAL: LUl: "Identify and enhance distinctive neighborhoods, communities, and
Centers throughout the city."
Policy: LUIK: "Promote neighborhoods which foster interaction among
residents, contribute to well-being of citizenry, and create and sustain a sense of
community and personal safety. "
GOAL: LU}: "Create an environment that will promote growth."
Policy: LU3E: "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. "
Housing Element
GOAL: H3: "Provide a variety of housing types and densities to meet changing needs of
Bremerton residents."
Policy H3C: "Stimulate the production f new housing for all incomes, ages, and
family types. "
GOAL: H6: "Build strong, cohesive neighborhoods with a majority of Bremerton
households owning their own homes."
Policy H6A: "Increase the opportunities for home ownership within the City of
Bremerton. "
GOAL: H7: "Promote safe, attractive, livable neighborhoods that will attract
homeowners. "
GOAL: H8: "Promote social interaction as well as neighborhood identity and initiatives."
BP04-00404
3 of24
Policy H8C: "Encourage walk-ability within neighborhoods. "
Transportation Element
GOAL: TR5: "Recognize the importance of easily accessible, attractive and well
dispersed parking as a valuable community asset."
Policy TR5A: "Implement parking ratios that reflect the least amount of spaces
required for development approval, where transportation options other than the
automobile are available to serve travel needs. "
Policy TR5B: "Require landscaping along the edge of parking areas to reduce
visual impact and aid in filtration of runoff.
City Services Element
GOAL: CS6: "Ensure adequate funding for public facilities and services for existing
development and new growth."
Policy CS6D: "Recognize responsibility of the development community In
providing for the impacts of new growth. "
GOAL: CS 15: "Enhance and enforce standards for infrastmcture and utilities, especially
in residential areas."
Policy CS 15A: "Emphasize conformity of design within sub-areas of the City,
especially neighborhoods. "
. Improve sidewalks throughout the City, especially accessibility features.
GOAL: CSI6: "Promote open spaces and "green spaces" for everyone's enjoyment."
Policy CS 16A: "Realize recreational needs in open space planning. "
CITY OF BREMERTON REQUIREMENT FOR A SUBDIVISION
The City of Bremerton has not adopted a subdivision ordinance. Therefore, the City
relies on the requirements set forth in RCW 58.17. The processing of a subdivision
application is set forth in BMC Section 21.02.855, which requires a Type IV City
Council Decision after an open record hearing and recommendation by the
Administrative Hearing Examiner. Final subdivision approval is set forth as a Type IV
City Council Decision after a closed record hearing.
8 P04-00404
4 of24
ANNEXATION (See Appendix D)
The City Council approved Ordinance No. 4922 annexing to the City the northern 6.14
acres of the site. Known as the "Racus Annexation", the effective date of the annexation
was January 10,2005. The Comprehensive Plan designation of the annexed area is Low
Density Residential (LDR) and carried a Residential Low-density (SF-3) zoning
designation.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, FUTURE ZONING
The Low Density Residential (LDR) designation of the property was enacted and made
effective as of December 17, 2004 by the City Council's approval of Ordinance No.
4917. The new LDR Comprehensive Plan designation will carry a new zoning
designation of R-I 0, which will be the City's primary zoning district to locate detached
single-family homes. The R-I0 development standards will include a density of 10
dwelling units per acre and minimum lots of 4,300 square feet. Approval of the Planned
Unit Development would superimpose the site plan over the existing and future zoning.
HISTORY OF THE APPLICATION (See Appendix E)
The application was originally submitted on October 20, 2004 as a subdivision. At the
time, the proposal included land inside and outside the City jurisdiction. The City
accepted the application with the understanding that the annexation of the northern 2/3 of
the site must be approved first before processing of the application could continue. A
letter dated November 2,2004 was sent to the applicant stating such.
After the City Council approved the annexation, the proposal did not comply with
development standards for those areas of the property carrying the SF-3 zoning
designation. Instead, the proposal was more consistent with the MF zoning designation
carried by the southern 1/3 of the site. The applicant chose to modify the application
request to become a Planned Unit Development/ subdivision instead. The necessary
revisions and the application fee were received February 9, 2005 and this marks the
official date the Planned Unit Development application was received.
The application was deemed incomplete on February 17, 2005 due to additional
information being requested and the proposal not complying with development standards
for a Planned Unit Development. Revisions were received and a second letter of
incomplete was sent March 14, 2005 due to a shortage of open space being incorporated
into the design. The necessary revisions were made and the application was deemed
complete as of April 21, 2005. The Public Works Department requested additional
changes to the street layout in order to meet City street standards, which the applicant
submitted revisions complying with these requirements on May 20,2005.
BP04-00404
5 of24
ANALYSIS:
BMC Section 21.02.855 sets forth preliminary Planned Unit Developments and
Subdivision applications as a Type IV City Council Decision. The Hearing Examiner
makes a recommendation after an open record pre-decision hearing.
ANALYSIS OF ZONING & PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
1. The intent of the Residential Low-density SF-3 zoning is to accommodate single-unit
homes in typical urban subdivision at an average density (without bonuses) of up to
eight (8) units per acre. It offers a smaller minimum lot size to enhance affordability
and encourage higher densities through creative site planning and various zoning and
density bonus incentives.
2. The intent of the Residential Medium-density MF zoning is to maintain existing areas
of multiple-unit dwellings and to provide for new development of needed housing
within the medium-density (8-18 duJ acre) level. Such development may include
small-lot single-unit clustered housing, garden and larger apartment complexes,
condominiums, and other housing alternatives, along with their customary related or
accessory uses.
3. The site consists of Residential Low-density SF-3 (northern 6.14 acres) and
Residential Medium-density MF (southern 3.31 acres) zoning districts. BMC Section
21.02.470(b) allows for the composite of two or more zoning districts within a
Planned Unit Development. The land uses of the two zoning districts may be allowed
anywhere within the PUD subject to the approval of the site plan.
4. Figure 140 (Land Use Tables) allows Single-family Dwellings - Detached in the SF-3
and MF zoning districts. The proposal to construct 70 detached single-family homes
over the entire site is consistent with the land use tables.
5. BMC Section 21.02.470(e) sets forth the maximum number of dwelling units allowed
per gross acre (43,560 square feet in an acre) in a Planned Unit Development. SF-3
zoned property, with 15 percent designated open space, is allowed a maximum
density of 8 dwellings per gross acre; and MF zoned property is allowed 18 dwelling
units per gross acre. The proposed density for this project is 7.4 dwellings per acre
(70 dwellings/9.45 acres), which complies with density requirements in both zones.
6. BMC Section 21.02.260 (Rounding of Fractions of Dwelling Units) allows a
maximum 109 dwellings on the site [(SF-3: 6.14 acres X 8 dwellings per acre) +
(MF: 3.31 acres X 18 dwellings per acre)]. The proposal is for 70 dwelling units,
which meets this requirement. Future R-lO zoning would allow potentially 95
dwellings (9.45 acres X 10 dwellings per acre) so the proposal complies with future
zoning as well.
BP04-00404
6 0[24
----
7. The main purpose of the Planned Unit Development is to allow variations to lot sizes
and setbacks.
8. The zoning code measures height pursuant to BMC Section 21.02.220. Height as
applicable to this project is measured from the highest adjoining sidewalk or ground
surface within a five-foot horizontal distance of the exterior wall of the building to the
highest point of the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof.
The application indicated maximum residential building height at 35 feet. However,
this was measured from the base of the structure to its highest point. If the proposed
residential structures were measured per Section 21.02.220, the maximum height
appears to be about 26 feet (see Appendix F).
9. BMC Section 21.02.490 requires the PUD to conform to specific development
standards.
a. Perimeter and Interior Setbacks:
(1) Structures are required to comply with a perimeter setback, which properties
greater than one acre shall be per 21.02.490(b)(2). The proposed residential
structure heights will not to exceed 30 feet as measured by BMC Section
21.02.220.
(2) The following summarizes the proposed perimeter setbacks.
Lot Line.
Definition
Front
Side
Lot Line
Location
West
North
South
East
~~Cl\lire~
Setb~ck
25 feet
1 0 feet
15 feet
10 feet
Staff........ .....
Comments
Ok
Ok
Rear
Ok
* A 10-foot side or rear perimeter setback is allowed if the height of the
building is restricted to 25 feet. Per the proposed site plan, Lots 6 through 19,
45, 46, 54 and 64 can comply with perimeter setbacks if the height of
structures on these lots is limited to 25 feet. The height may be increased to
30 feet for those portions of a structure setback 15 feet from the perimeter
property line pursuant to BMC Section 21.02.490(b)(3).
(3) Non-perimeter setbacks within the PUD are based on the underlying zone
requirements, but may be modified through the PUD process to achieve
project design objectives. The proposal modifies the non-perimeter setbacks
in a manner that contributes to a better-designed project.
BP04-00404
7 of24
b. Height: Figure 130 (Lot Requirements) limits height within the SF-3 zone to 30
feet and within the MF zone to 40 feet. The PUD process allows heights to vary
from the underlying zoning district if the project integrates and harmonizes with
surrounding existing and proposed developments. The proposed height of 25 - 26
feet for residential structures is consistent with the height allowed by the SF-3
zoning. While a height was not given for the sports court building, it would
harmonize with the development if its maximum height were allowed at the MF
zoning height of 40 feet because of its central location within the development.
c. Open Space: A minimum 15 percent of the total area of the PUD shall be
dedicated as common open space. The proposal requires 61,746.3 square feet
(9.45 acres X 0.15) of open space for the site. A reduction of up to 25 percent of
the required open space may be granted if a recreation building, swimming pool,
or similar major recreational facility that will better provide for the needs of the
residents without significantly detracting from the project's appearance or
environmental quality is provided.
The following is an analysis ofthe proposed open space.
(1) Per BMC Section 21.02.490(d)(1), open space cannot include, roads
driveways and alleys; parking, loading and storage areas, perimeter setback
areas, interior setbacks required to separate buildings or apply to individual
lots; and small remnants of land that are not physically, visually, or
functionally related to the project's overall sight plan.
(2) The proposal includes 54,960 square feet of open space, which computes into
13.4 percent of the site. Open space areas that are not disqualified by Section
21.02.490( d)(I) are located in three tracts:
. Tract A is a 32,432 square foot "active" open space area containing a Tot
lot and sports court building.
. Tract B is a 16,250 square foot "active" open space area and serves as a
picnicking area and general sports field area (the applicant indicated on
the site plan that this tract was 16,750 square feet, but mistakenly included
about 500 square feet located within the perimeter setback area.
. Tract E is a 6,278 square foot "active" open space area and may also serve
as a picnicking area (the applicant indicated on the site plan that this tract
was 7,078, but mistakenly included about 800 (10 feet X 80 feet) square
feet located within the perimeter setback area.
. Other tracts on the site plan indicated as "passive" open spaces are
disqualified by Section 21.02.490(d)(I) because they either are located
within perimeter setbacks or are isolated functionally to integrate
effectively into the open space plan.
BP04-00404 8 of24
(3) Pursuant to BMC Section 21.02.490(d)(7), the required open space area may
be reduced up to 25 percent if provision are made for a recreation building,
swimming pool, or similar major recreational facility that will better provide
for the needs of the residents without significantly detracting from the
project's appearance or environmental quality. The applicant is proposing to
construct a covered sports court with a barbequing facility to qualify for the
reduction.
STAFF CONCLUSION: The Director reviewed the covered sports court and
barbequing facility and found this acceptable in allowing the reduction
because it would enhancing recreational opportunities for the residents. The
61,746.3 square feet of required open space may be reduced by up to 9,262
(61,746 square feet X 0.25). This reduction allows the required open space to
be determined at 52,484.3 square feet. The proposed 54,960 square feet of
opens space therefore exceeds the open space requirement.
(4) The open space requirement is broken down in the following manner.
1. Active open space: a minimum two-thirds (2/3) of the open space is
required to be active areas such as playgrounds, picnic areas sports courts,
etc. The Director and City Engineer deem it acceptable to incorporate the
storm retention into the open space area provide it is designed in a manner
that it serves a recreational purpose. This can be achieved by providing a
wider and shallower retention pond. The proposed open space qualifies
entirely as "active" and therefore meets the opens space requirement.
2. Passive open space: is optional and may consist of up to one-third (1/3) of
the open space. None of the proposed open space qualifies as passive
open space.
d. Screening: All utility facilities, loading areas, trash containers, and outdoor
storage areas shall be screened from surrounding properties. The final plan shall
address screening requirements.
e. Architectural Theme: Structural elements, including accessory structures, are
required to be integrated into a primary architectural theme carried through the
development. The conceptual designs of the residential structures indicated the
PUD has an integrated architectural theme.
10. BMC Section 21.02.510 requires an open space guarantee, which ensures the
retention of the open spaces and provides for permanent maintenance of the open
space and commonly owned facilities.
BP04-00404
9 of24
11. BMC Section 21.02. 700(b) exempts any residential development consisting of one or
two-unit structures from landscaping requirements, except for Planned Unit
Developments, special use permits, or other plans-in-lieu of the underlying zone. The
City requires the Planned Unit Developments to provide street trees along Pine Road
pursuant to BMC 21.02.700(a)(I)(iii). One street tree is required per each 25 feet of
lineal street frontage. The PUD has approximately 617 feet of street frontage (650
feet total minus the 33-foot wide ingress/ egress) requiring 25 street trees. The
landscaping plan shows 14 trees proposed so additional trees will be required along
Pine Road.
12. Consistent with BMC Section 21.02.340(c) and the requirement for landscaping, the
Planned Unit Development is required to preserve, to the greatest extent possible, the
existing landscape features and minimize adverse effects on sensitive environmental
areas. The applicant is proposing to preserve about 32 existing significant trees on
the site and plant additional trees along north and east boundaries. This is found
acceptable in meeting this requirement.
13. BMC Section 21.02.070 definition of Lot requires a minimum of 20 feet of frontage
on either a public or private street. The majority of the individual lots have street
frontage between 40 and 54 feet, which meets this requirement. Lots 44 and 45 have
street frontage of 10 feet, and Lots 46 and 47 have street frontage of 15 feet and 7 feet
respectively. The reduced street frontages may be allowed through the PUD process
and are found acceptable.
14. BMC Section 21.02.460 superimposes the PUD onto the underlying zoning and
allows for exceptions to the lot requirements of the underlying zoning district,
including modifications to lot size, setbacks, height and other similar requirements.
15. Proposed development standards for individual lots:
18 3,200 15 ft 10 ft 5ft
19 3,600 15 ft 10 ft 5ft&10ft
20 3,200 15 ft 5 ft** 5ft
21 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
22 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
23 3,200 15 ft 5 ftu 5ft
24 3,200 15 ft 5 ft** 5ft
25 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
26 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
27 3,120 15 ft 5ft 5ft
28 3,600 20 ft 5 ft** 5ft
29 3,200 15 ft 5 ft 5ft
30 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
31 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
32 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5 ft
33 3,600 20 ft 5 ft ** 5ft
34 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5 ft
35 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
36 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5 ft
37 3,200 20 ft 5 ftu 5ft
38 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
39 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
40 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
41 3,200 15 ft 5 ft 5ft
42 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
43 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
44 3,478 25 ft 5ft 5ft
45 3,403 25 ft 5ft 5ft&10ft
46 3,680 25 ft 5ft 5ft&10ft
47 3,200 25 ft 5ft 5ft
48 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5 ft
49 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
50 3,200 15 ft 5 ft** 5ft
51 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
52 3,200 15 ft 5ft 5ft
53 3,200 15 ft 5 ft** 5ft
54 4,018 20 ft 5 ftu 5ft
55 3,320 15 ft 15 ft 5ft
56 3,360 15 ft 15 ft 5 ft
57 3,440 15 ft 15 ft 5ft
58 3,480 15 ft 15 ft 5 ft
59 3,600 15 ft 15 ft 5ft
60 3,640 15 ft 15 ft 5ft
61 3,680 15 ft 15 ft 5ft
62 3,720 15 ft 15 ft 5ft
63 3,800 15 ft 5 ft** 5ft
64 3,870 15 ft 25 ft* 5ft&10ft
65 3,600 15 ft 25 ft* 5ft
66 3,600 15 ft 25 ft* 5ft
67 3,600 15 ft 25 ft* 5ft
68 3,600 15 ft 25 ft* 5 ft
69 3,600 15 ft 25 ft* 5 ft
70 4,410 15 ft 25 ft* 5 ft**
BP04-00404
11 0[24
* Through Lot: second front yard setback
** Comer Lot: second front yard setback
***Side Yard Setback for both sides unless specified otherwise
Lot coverage will vary depending on what model of building is selected to be
constructed on a particular lot. Building footprints will be between 1,700 to 2,400
square feet and will average between 54 to 60 percent lot coverage on the
individual lots.
16. The proposed lot development standards are deemed satisfactory and consistent with
the intent of Planned Unit Developments and the MF and SF-3 zoning designations.
17. Off-street parking is required per Figure 670(a). Detached single-family dwellings
require 2 parking spaces per unit. The proposal includes 2 off-street parking spaces
per each dwelling, which complies with this requirement.
18. In addition to the on-street parking, 12 guest parking spaces are proposed at four
locations on the site. However, pursuant to BMC 21.02.490(e)(5) no parking or
maneuvering areas, other than access driveways, shall be allowed within the PUD's
perimeter setbacks when the development is within or abutting any residential zoning
district. The three guest parking spaces between Lots 4 and 5, and the two guest
parking spaces between Lots 63 and 64 are located within perimeter setbacks and
therefore are not allowed. These guest parking spaces shall either be deleted from or
re-located on the final PUD site plan.
19. Pursuant to BMC Section 21.02.370, a neighborhood meeting was required prior to
submission of the application. The applicant mailed notification of the meeting to
property owners within 700 feet. The meeting was held February 8, 2005 at the City
Council 1 sl Floor Chambers located at the Norm Dicks Government Center, 345 Sixth
Street, Bremerton. Seventeen (17) people attended the meeting. Questions were
raised about traffic impacts and improvements to Pine Road and there was concern
about the project connecting Hanford Road to Pine Road. Additional questions were
raised about the price of the homes, eagle habitat, home designs, the falling of tree
leaves, future neighborhood development, and neighborhood compatibility. (See
Appendix G.)
20. Development of the site will involve the removal and clearing of 9.45 acres of
forestland as defined by RCW 73.09.020(9). The removal of more than 5 acres of
forested trees qualifies as a Forest Practice Class IV(c) conversion to urban
development pursuant to RCW 76.09.050(1). The City of Bremerton has not adopted
standards for Class IV forest practices. Therefore, pursuant to RCW 73.09.240(3),
the applicant must seek approval from the Washington Department of Natural
Resources for a Class IV Forest Practices permit. Approval of a Forest Practice
permit will be included as a condition of approving the final Planned Unit
Development/ plat.
BP04-00404
12 of24
21. The City submitted notice and a SEP A checklist to the Bremerton School District.
The school district did not provide any comments on the proposal.
ANALYSIS OF THE CRITICAL LANDS ORDINANCE (Chapter 21.22)
22. There are no indications of critical areas on the property. During the neighborhood
meeting, the possibility of an eagle nest in one of the trees was raised. Myers
Biodynamics evaluated the site and prepared a Bald Eagle Nest determination dated
March 3,2005 determining that the nest was not an eagle nest. (See Appendix H.)
ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS
23. Pursuant to BMC Section 11.12.060, the City Engineer required a traffic impact
analysis for the proposal because of potentially significant impacts to Pine Road.
Heath & Associates prepared Brandywine Traffic Impact Analysis (September 2004)
evaluating traffic impacts by the proposal. The study projected an average weekday
volume of 749 trips per day. The AM peak is estimated at 59 vehicles an hour and
the PM peak is 78 vehicles an hour. (See Appendix I.)
24. The traffic report determined that the intersection at Pine Road and Sylvan Avenue
would be the most affected by the development. The intersection would have its
current Level of Service (LOS) B reduced to LOS C. The City does not have a
concurrency ordinance. The City Traffic Engineer reviewed this impact and
determined no mitigation was necessary. The reduced LOS was acceptable. The
report concluded that the project will be a moderate generator of new trips in the area
and proposed no mitigation.
25. The development is served by public transit services on Pine Road. Kitsap Transit
Route 17 and 23 provide service to the area. A bus stop is located directly in front of
the property.
26. The City Engineer will require frontage improvements to be installed along Pine
Road. While the Pine Road directly fronting the property is located within Kitsap
County, cooperation between the City and County requires the road to be developed
to the City's standard for a Collector Arterial. These standards are set forth in the
City's Engineering Standard 3001 (Road Classification). Frontage improvements will
include a 5-foot wide sidewalk, 12-foot wide lanes, a 6-foot planter strip, curb and
gutter, a 5-foot wide bike lane and other improvements.
27. The City Engineer may modify street engineering requirements under the authority of
BMC Section 11.12.030. What when Pine Road is completely built out it will be a
75-foot wide right-of-way. Future right-of-way dedication will be required. A 7.5-
foot wide public easement adjacent to Pine Road is allowed at this time to locate
sidewalk and utilities along Pine Road. The remaining improvements will be located
within the existing public right-of-way.
BP04-00404
13 of24
28. BMC Subsection 1 1. 12. 130(e)(2) allows private streets that are part of a Planned Unit
Development provided the street is designed and constructed to engineering
standards. The pun's interior road system will remain as private roads with Pun
property owners responsible for the maintenance.
29. The City Traffic Engineer anticipates the individual interior roads will carry less than
400 Average Daily Trips. Functionally the interior streets may be developed as Local
Access Two Way pursuant to City Engineering Standard 3001 (Road Classification).
Applicable standards include the following:
. Sidewalks on both sides;
. On-street parking lanes on one side;
. Two 10-foot wide lanes;
. 4-foot wide planter strips;
. Curb and gutter on both sides; and
. 5-foot wide utility easement on each side.
30. The City Engineer reviewed the interior street system and determined its design
acceptable. The interior roads will be developed on individual tracts with the main
roads developed with two lO-foot wide lanes, an 8-foot wide parking strip on one
side, 5-foot sidewalks on both sides, curb and gutters on both sides and a utility
easement. The requirement for a planter strip has been waived. The entrance to the
development will be required to have three II-foot wide lanes for ingress and egress.
31. The road providing immediate access to Lots 44 and 45 will be developed as a Shared
Driveway Access. This requires two 9-foot wide lanes. The proposal shows a 15-
foot wide lane with 5-foot sidewalk, which will need to be modified to meet fire and
City road standards.
32. The Local Access Two Road, which fronts on Lots 50 through 58, Lots 46, and 47,
has a dead end. The length of this stretch of road is approximately 170 feet from the
intersection to Lots 50 through 58, and about 285 feet to Lots 46 and 47. Roads
greater than 150 feet, but less than 200 feet must include a hammerhead turnaround
per Engineering Drawing 3011. Dead end streets greater than 200 feet require a cul-
de-sac turnaround per Engineer Drawing 3005. The City Engineer has approved
deviations to these standards by accepting the hammerhead turnaround to be
incorporated into the street design in lieu of a cul-de-sac. The Fire Marshall reviewed
the street system layout and found it acceptable.
33. BMC 21.02.490(e)(5) no parking or maneuvering areas, other than access driveways,
shall be allowed within the pun's perimeter setbacks when the development is within
or abutting any residential zoning district. The PUD is within and abuts residentially
zoned properties. Portions of the hammerhead turnaround adjacent to Lot 54 and the
road end adjacent to Lot 19 are located within the PUD perimeter setback areas.
Final PUD design will require modifications so that no maneuver areas are located
within the perimeter setback areas.
BP04-00404
14 of24
34. BMC Section 21.02.490(e) establishes the requirements for circulation.
a. Subsection (J) requires all streets, and rights of ways to be dedicated, designed
and constructed in accordance with the City's adopted street standards.
STAFF COMMENT: All of the streets within the Planned Unit Development will
be developed to City engineering standards. The City Engineer has approved
some minor deviations. BMC Section 21.02.070 (Definitions) requires private
road tracts to be located on individual road tracts at least 20 feet wide. The
interior streets will be developed on private right-of-way tracts at least 20 feet
wide. Ownership and maintenance of the private streets will be the responsibility
of the individual property owners.
b. Subsection (3) requires pedestrian circulation.
STAFF COMMENT: The interior sidewalks will provide pedestrian circulation
within the development. The interior sidewalks connect to the new sidewalks
being installed along Pine Road providing safe pedestrian circulation inside and
outside the development.
c. Subsection (4) requires all streets and parking areas to contribute to the overall
aesthetic design of the PUD while minimizing traffic congestion and the amount
of impervious surface.
STAFF COMMENT: The grid street pattern within the development contributes
to the aesthetic design of the development and provides physical linkage
throughout the development. On-street parking and guest parking spaces are well
integrated into the project in a manner that slows traffic down while not creating
an obstruction to pedestrians. Reduced garage setbacks will reduce driveway
surfaces and help minimize impervious surface. The entrance/ exit way into the
development is designed to reduce congestion as three lanes will provide easy and
safe access in and out of the development.
35. The property is located within the City's utility service area. Water and sewer are
available per the Conditional Water and Sewer Availability Letter (see APPENDIX J).
The water and sewer mains will be required to be extended throughout the
development in a manner to provide services to the individual lots. Compliance to
the Department of Utilities Development and Construction Standards, APW AlDOT
Specifications, A WW A Standards, and Title 15 of the Bremerton Municipal Code are
required.
36. The City Engineer reviewed the proposal for storm water drainage requirements. A
preliminary storm drainage report and civil plans have been submitted. The City
Engineer must still approve final storm and grading plans prior to finalizing the POO/
Subdivision. (See APPENDIX K.)
BP04-00404
15 of24
37. Fire hydrants and fire flow is required per Appendix Band C of the International Fire
Code (IFC) for residential development. Fire hydrants shall be located so there is at
least 1 hydrant within 150 feet, and no portion of a building or structure is more than
300 feet from a hydrant. These standards may be modified if an approved sprinkler
system is installed in individual residential dwellings.
38. BMC Section 11.12.200 requires street lighting along all public streets. Street
illumination in accordance with engineering standards is required along Pine Road
and along all of the private streets within the development. A detailed street lighting
plan is required and must be approved by the City Engineer.
39. Street or road signs are required to identify the Local Access Two Way streets. All
street signs shall meet City standards as provided for in Engineer Standards 3251
through 3300. Installation of signage will be required as a condition of final
approval.
COMMENTS RECEIVED
40. CITY COMMENTS: (Appendix L)
,,<~ttYPep'~:rjtm~Jjt,~
Building
Engineering Department
......::.gc..............:....Q.....:.....m.:......'......... ..tI1.<:'ent~';Rec, ei*ed.....,.
<---' ~------ . ---', - ':, -, - -. " - '--- -" - ,
C';,-"",_,:,
No comments
. Frontage improvements required along Pine Road, which will
ultimately be developed as a 7S-foot wide right-of-way
. A 7.S-foot wide public access easement is required for future
right-of-way dedication
. Curb, gutter, sidewalk, storm drainage and street lighting is
required along the frontage
. Streets within the plat shall meet the Local Access Street
Standards
. An 8-foot wide parking strip on one side is required and the
other side shall be signed "no parking'
. Planter strip requirement within the plat will be waived
. Parking areas near the entrance from Pine Road must be
relocated away from the entrance
. Detailed water and sewer and storm drainage plans must be
approved prior to final PUD approval
. Detailed street lighting plan shall be approved and installed or
bonded for prior to final PUD approval
. All interior drainage from private facilities within the PUD shall
remain private. Road and Storm Drainage Maintenance
Agreement shall be recorded prior to PUD final approval
. All conveyance for offsite storm water flows shall be public
storm systems with a minimum 20-foot wide easements
provided
BP04-00404
16 of24
Fire · Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed
width of not less than 20 feet except for approved security
gates
. Street or Road signs are required and must be posted within
30 days of approval form the City Engineering Department
. Road way surfaces shall be designed and maintained to
support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall have an
all weather surface
. Provide fire hydrants and fire flow per IFC Appendix Band C
. Fire hydrants shall be located so that there is at least 1
hydrant within 150 feet and no portion of a structure is more
than 300 feet from a hydrant
Cross Connection Control OK - all irrigation systems shall have separate service lines and
separate meters whenever possible, and shall have an
approved double detector check valve assemblies
Traffic OK
LOCAL AND STATE AGENCY COMMENTS (See Appendix M.)
..........to8~J;.aAd,$t~t~.:~g~n~i~~:
Community, Trade and
Economic Development
Puget Sound Water Quality
Action Team
Suquamish Tribe
Department ofFish & Wildlife
Department of Transportation
- Olympic Region
Department of Natural
Resources
Department of Transportation
Department of Ecology
Kitsap Transit
Kitsap County Health District
Kitsap County Department of
Community Development
Bremerton School District
. .....'i.~~mment$.~~~~iv~d...
None
None
None
None
None
If trees will be removed/ harvested then a Forest Practices
Application will be required per RCW 73.09 and WAC 222
None
None
None
Standard comments regarding fill and location near a landfill
None
None
41. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED (See Appendix N)
>M'ho
Debra A. Marangi
800 Hanford Avenue
Bremerton, W A 98310
.............!.:;;.;($ljittitt~~9f Cotnffi~n.~s
· Wanted to know if there would be a green
belt between the new project and Hanford
Avenue homes
. Wanted to know if any improvements would
be made to the end of Hanford Avenue
· Wanted to know if there was a fence around
the property
BP04-00404
17 of 24
Joe L. Rhodes
4295 Cobblestone Lane NE
Bremerton, W A 98310
. Expressed concerns about traffic increase
and the number of quest parking spaces
. Wanted to know if a traffic signal would be
installed
. Concerns about environmental impacts such
as noise, traffic congestion and ground water
runoff
42. BMC Section 21.02.480 requires a PUD to conform to the following general criteria.
(a) The location, design, and uses of the PUD shall be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, Bremerton Shoreline Management Program, and with other
applicable plans and ordinances adopted by the City.
STAFF: Clustering low-density residential attached dwellings is consistent with
several goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The development provides
new housing opportunities for home ownership and will foster interaction among
its residents through shared recreational facilities. The PUD encourages a sense
of community by providing a well-integrated architectural design for the
neighborhood. The land use tables in the zoning code support detached single-
family dwellings, particularly in neighborhoods where single-family residences
already exist.
(b) The PUD shall be integrated with its surroundings and designed to harmonize
with existing or proposed development in the neighborhood. In the case of a
departure in character from the surrounding land uses, the scale, intensity and
design shall adequately reduce the impact of the development in such a way that
the project will not be detrimental to the neighborhood.
STAFF: The preservation of open space and the design of detached single-family
dwellings integrate well with the existing single-family residential development
found in the neighboring area.
(c) The traffic generated by the PUD shall be accommodated safely and within the
adopted Levels of Service for affected streets.
STAFF: the City Engineer reviewed the proposal for traffic impacts and
determined that the anticipated traffic increase is negligible, and will not
significantly affect the traffic conditions of Pine Road and the surrounding road
network. The increase in traffic can safely be accommodated by the surrounding
transportation system.
BP04-00404
18 of24
(d) All development will be adequately served by existing or planned facilities and
services.
ST AFF: Sewer and water are available to the site as referenced in the City
Engineer's comments. The extension of water and sewer lanes will provide
services to the individual lots.
(e) The PUD will result in an attractive, healthful, efficient and stable environment
for living, shopping, working, and leisure activities.
STAFF: The design of the residential structures will upgrade the existing
neighborhood so that it provides a more livable neighborhood.
(f) The development plan shall make adequate and appropriate provision for the
preservation of the environment, both natural and man-made, and the
conservation of energy.
STAFF: The PUD makes provisions for adequate open space and protection of
the environment. Significant trees will be preserved wherever possible and will
be integrated into the overall landscaping of the project.
43. A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued May 26, 2005. Notice was
posted on the property and published in The Sun newspaper on this date.
44. Notification was sent to properties within a 300-foot radius of the subject property
(See APPENDIx 0). Notification was provided as follows:
Application received:
Determination of Completeness
Notice of Application
DNS published
Notice of Hearing
February 9,2005
April 21, 2005
April 27, 2005
May 26, 2005
May 26, 2005
FINDINGS:
The City of Bremerton Department of Community Development makes the following
findings in support of a recommendation.
1. The proposed preliminary Planned Unit Development and plat complies with the City
of Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would be located in an area with
the capacity to absorb development and is consistent with the surrounding existing
single-family developments. The proposal will allow for a variety oflots and housing
opportunities and is located in an area with adequate sewer and water services are
available.
BP04-00404
19 of24
2. The proposed development meets the general criteria set forth in BMC Section
21.02.480. The proposed Planned Unit Development will superimpose onto the
underlying zoning allowing exceptions to lot coverage, individual lot sizes and
setback requirements. The design of the detached single-family dwellings of the
Planned Unit Development integrates well with the single-family development found
within the surrounding neighborhoods. Significant trees will be preserved and
additional landscaping will provide a more attractive living environment. The public
interest is served by promoting residential development through land use clustering
techniques in order to preserve open space and create recreational opportunities.
3. Adequate provisions are made for playgrounds and recreation. The proposal includes
a tot lot and the covered sports court and barbequing facility meets the recreational
purpose for allowing a reduction in the open space area. The 13.4 percent open space
meets the PUD open space and recreational requirements.
4. The traffic generated by the new development can be accommodated safely into Pine
Road and the surrounding transportation system. Adequate provisions have been
made for streets and sidewalks, which will be constructed to City of Bremerton street
engineering standards. The grid pattern of the streets and sidewalks will contribute to
the overall aesthetic of the development. Sidewalks within the development and
along Pine Road will ensure that pedestrian circulation is safe and convenient. A
transit stop is located adjacent to the development.
5. With conditions, city water and sewer services are adequately available as referenced
in the Conditional Water and Sewer Availability letter. A preliminary storm water
report and plans were submitted and final plans meeting City standards will be
required.
6. The procedural requirements for processing the preliminary plat and Planned Unit
Development were complied with. A neighborhood meeting was held February 8,
2005. The application was formally accepted on February 9, 2005 and determined
complete on April 21, 2005. The Notice of Application was published in The Sun
newspaper and posted on the property on April 27, 2005 and the Notice of Hearing on
May 26,2005. Mailed notice was sent to property owners within 300 feet of the site
and parties requesting such notice.
7. The public health, safety and general welfare of the City of Bremerton have been
served in that comments from agencies and the public have been considered and
addressed in relation to this application and conditioned below.
8. A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was issued May 26, 2005 utilizing the
Optional DNS process under WAC 197-11-355. Conditions were included for clean
fill, adequate control measures for roadway dust control, and compliance with forest
practice rules.
BP04-00404
20 of24
CONCLUSION FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND SUBDIVISION
If approved, subject to the following conditions, the preliminary Planned Unit
Development and subdivision would comply with the City of Bremerton Comprehensive
Plan and applicable Bremerton Municipal Code development regulations.
1. The Planned Unit Development shall constitute a limitation on the use and design of
the site to those uses, designs and standards that are specifically included in the
Planned Unit Development. Such limitation shall remain in effect until the Planned
Unit Development is constructed, or until the preliminary approval expires in which
case the previous zoning automatically returns.
2. Final plans for the tot lot and the covered sports court with barbequing facility shall
be provided to the City and approved by the Director. The tot lot and covered sports
court with barbequing facility shall be installed or bonded for prior to finalizing the
Planned Unite Development! plat.
3. Lots 5 through 19, Lot 45, Lot 46, Lot 54 and Lot 64 shall have the maximum
building heights restricted to 25 feet as measured by BMC Section 21.02.220. The
height on these lots may be increased to 30 feet for those portions of a structure
setback 15 feet or more from the Planned Unit Development perimeter property line.
This height restriction shall be recorded on the face of the final plat.
4. One street tree per twenty-five (25) lineal feet of street frontage shall be provided
within the front yard perimeter setbacks along Pine Road. Revisions to the
landscaping plan are required and a final landscaping plan must be approved by the
Director prior to finalizing the Planned Unit Development/ plat.
5. Significant trees shall be preserved pursuant to the submitted landscaping plan. The
Director may approve modifications if found necessary to allow for revisions to the
development.
6. The required landscaping along Pine Road shall be installed or bonded for prior to
finalizing the Planned Unit Development/ plat. The remaining landscaping may be
provided as the site is developed, but must be installed before building permits that
allow occupancy are finalized.
7. An open space guarantee, which ensures the retention of and provides for permanent
maintenance of the open space (active and passive) is required per BMC Section
21.02.510 prior to finalizing the Planned Unit Development. The open space
guarantee language shall be approved by the City and shown on the face of the final
plat.
BP04-00404
21 of 24
8. The Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) requires approval of a
Forest Practice IV - General application prior to clearing the site. A copy of DNR's
approval of the Forest Practice application shall be submitted to the City before
beginning work to clear the site.
9. A minimum of two off-street parking spaces per each dwelling unit shall be provided.
This condition shall be indicated on the face of the final plat.
10. Parking spaces located within the Planned Unit Development's perimeter setback
areas shall be removed or relocated. No parking spaces are allowed within the
Planned Unit Development's perimeter setback areas. Approval of the final Planned
Unit Development site plan shall reflect this requirement.
11. Addresses for the individual lots shall be obtained from the Public Works department
and shall be indicated on the final plat.
12. Street frontage improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and street lighting are
required along Pine Road. Frontage improvements shall meet City engineering
requirements for a Collector Arterial, BMC Title 11 and the City Engineer's
comments.
13. Frontage improvements along Pine Road shall be installed or bonded for prior to
finalizing the Planned Unit Development. Approval of Right-of-Way Permits from
the City of Bremerton and Kitsap County Public Works Departments are required
prior to beginning construction.
14. A 7.5-foot wide public easement for sidewalks and utilities adjacent to Pine Road is
required. The easement shall be recorded on the face of the final plat. Language for
the easement shall be approved by the City Public Works Department.
15. Private streets within the Planned Unit Development shall be developed according to
City engineering standards for Local Access Streets, BMC Title 11 and the City
Engineer's comments. The requirement for a planter strip is waived. All street, curb,
gutter and sidewalk improvements shall be installed or bonded for prior to finalizing
the Planned Unit Development/ plat.
16. Revisions to the final street plan are required so that street ends are not located within
the PUD's perimeter setback areas, and the road access to Lots 44 and 45 shall be at
least 20 feet wide. The City Engineer and the Community Development Director
must approve the revisions prior to finalizing the Planned Unit Development/ plat.
17. Street or road signs are required to identify streets within the Planned Unit
Development. All street signs shall meet City standards as provided for in Engineer
Standards 3251 through 3300 and shall be installed or bonded for prior to finalizing
the Planned Unit Development/ plat.
BP04-00404
22 of24
18. Street lighting along the Planned Unit Development's interior private road system is
required, which meets the requirements of Title 11 of the Bremerton Municipal Code.
The City Engineer's approval of a final street lighting plan is required. Street lighting
shall be installed or bonded for prior to finalizing the Planned Unit Development/
plat.
19. A final storm drainage plan must be approved by the City Engineer. Storm drainage
facilities shall be installed or bonded for prior to finalizing the Planned Unit
Development! plat. All conveyance for offsite storm water flows shall be deemed as
public storm systems requiring a minimum 20-foot wide easement. The easement
shall be shown on the face of the final plat.
20. Maintenance agreements for the street and storm drainage systems shall be recorded
prior to finalizing the Planned Unit Development/ plat. The language for the
agreement may be recorded in a separate document or on the face of the final plat.
Language for the agreement must be approved by the City Engineer.
21. Water and sewer improvements shall be provided per the Conditional Water and
Sewer Availability letter. Water and sewer mains shall be extended through the
development to provide services to individual lots. All sewer and water
improvements shall meet Department of Utilities Development and Construction
Standards, APW A/DOT Specifications, A WW A Standards, and Title 15 of the
Bremerton Municipal Code. All water and sewer improvements must be approved by
the City Engineer and shall be installed or bonded for prior to finalizing the Planned
Unit Development/ plat.
22. Fire hydrants with flows meeting International Fire Codes Appendix B & C shall be
installed or bonded for prior to finalizing Planned Unit Development/ plat. Location
of the fire hydrants shall meet International Fire Code requirements and the Fire
Marshall's comments. If bonding is used, the fire hydrants shall be installed prior to
any construction above the foundation.
23. All conditions set forth in the Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) shall be
included as conditions for approving the Planned Unit Development/ plat.
24. The applicant shall pay in full all fees charged for the public hearing prior to the
issuance of any permits for clearing or construction on the site, and the submission of
the final plat.
25. A final Planned Unit Development and plat meeting RCW 58.17.160 (requirements
for recording a plat), WAC 332-130 (minimum standards for recording a plat),
applicable development standards and conditions shall be submitted to the City for
approval within two (2) years of the date of preliminary plat approval pursuant to
BMC Section 21.02.520(a).
BP04-00404
23 of24
26. Two copies of the plat certificate shall be submitted with the application for final
approval of the plat and Planned Unit Development.
27. Six (6) copies of the Planned Unit Development and plat (not Mylar) shall be
submitted to the Department of Community Development for final compliance
reView.
28. The Director of Community Development shall approve the final Planned Unit
Development prior to finalizing the plat.
29. A copy of the recorded Planned Unit Development and plat shall be provided to the
Department of Community Development before building permits can be issued.
END OF STAFF REPORT
SIGNATURE OF STAFF PREPARING REpORT:
'T)~~ .~~ __.c:"-)"~/'..
_ ,'~-- (~/'l
.' '.. ~ "'-,..~ -'-'--~...-""
~_.' \ .. '---.-.-
Robert 1. Grumbach, AICP
Planner
BP04-00404
24 of24
__288.71'
~f =!H-m-!!;.
7rJP06R_ .. BOUNDARy _lEY
O.4T.4 BY: CIEl'llillaN I'fIECtSI(}N
SINl>f:l1M:l u.c.
1'.11 BOX ItZl, ~_ _ _
lEI.: [-l _,m' FAX: [MOl_5UJ
PIlD.ECT NO: 005IlB DA~ 5/12;lU
fJ*...~
11'/ sux;.
HOT. UIIIT
CF2!JFT.
DBIJ/UJING
S'/E:A11C.4
.. . .. '%:r.BIf:;,T
CF35FT.
/yorE:
QUI
~(
.....
034-00
Ion
I
i 002-00
VICINITy MAP
....-
""'" ,'..
"caMIII.I1"ILI!UL~
III '.', ,., , ., PLlTIItIDJI!ICr
.............
'Jt,
7.5' SIf)E';VAl.K fliTILlTY
WElolENT
038-00
. NllClLLDtA'nDWI'I1IIflI1M1 an'GP--....
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
039-00
" IPLAII
---
--......
-......
WA1llt
-
II1IIM!WA1IRCDmIOI.S
-
-
...........
-....-
a__
a..........1
a _....
aU...........
D CllYCIP.......
D cnYDI'--'"
a ......_
CI....._~
a~.' .II"~~.I.
a CAICIDR..........
a .......-
"0P'1DI'AL
-
I&M
.....
.-
TRACT "F" 4(J
AU!IM!'.-.a_t.,.,...,..
. .......... W.MM-
. CQtlWllClllOIIUI~
. 'IOI'AL urr AIIM
a ... M:.
a .... M:.
a ..... M:.
..
..
a 2I7,11D ~".
a a,2OO _ Pr.
e I,a7 _".
a 2AU _n.
040-00
. 1YPEAL LOI'IIBl:
.~urr...
. "" LOI'~
041-00
.......
---
PERhMETl:.7{ 42
SETBACK UNE ~
042-00
.000L01'~ a 14DUCL :IAO~
.~ CI :M1fICII.
'IVIN.I Cl 174 ~
* ,. , ..........IIDIWAUlAIIM. ........4:
PROJECT DATA:
-- I ~ I SIZI!.
PMM! Nl\ME.~
~ I ~~I~.~
~ac\lCMNl ~ 12:'::
I ~ I :T ~:::t".
~~ I -:'-:.4INr::-:.
"'::&.~AItM I I.~a.:a r::::.
=~ I a::.,.... III'!'/:
~ I ST~ I r.::
~ I = 1:-::
=' I=~
7.5' SIDEWALK fliTfLi
fA..<;f.ViENT
SSMH R.....273.94.
1:~~~:Z::
12-00
001-00
LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE
~c::i
~ :::i ~
~ ~i
s:>-~
~ Q: ~
~ ~ I'
~i
-
i:i:I
2:
~CLlENT:~
=~A
GfwHriDr,
w.. 9B335
, ,
1~1
I .---. I
::-'~=-J.
JOB NO:-
04 - 0401
PAGE
11
D~
%~T
OF J5 FT.
-\-
SCALE':\ 1"== 40' \
(iOTL. ~g-.\\' I
I.t. SCU'1M*te2.a&'
~~~
5lIRK'tfHC1 1..1..c.
P.D. 801( fln. OfflJHG, WASH. ll&1fO
'/lI.: (_J ~T1f . FAX: C-J 1lIIJ-~
I'flOLCT NO< ~ DAn:: '/I~
8.'.~
~T
OF25FT.
NJO
---
n_
7~!i'
Ii
(l~
TOT LOT
oIL..
_, - r;:~~f
.. ..' rJ:il._
VICINITY MAP
- ..'
-
~,., ",,,...-
-~.....~
~pUl.T'-'
38
7.5' 5IDF,VAu<iD/ifILl1Y
f.lt5EAiE~ ~
038-00
. -..-..........1IlICITI'OO--"'"
--"""'"!: I .. '
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
--
---
..~.....
a ..........1.
.. YioUll!'-
"...._._"
"CITI''''~
~~~
g=;'==--
.. CoICN"'---
,,--
......-
-
J3,IO
.....
-
1.I.Ic::i
~:i ~
~~t
~ >- i
~iil
&Q ~ I
ii1
~
39
~....
===-..
....-.....
-
=........--s
=
...,.........
_orn-
az.8AC.
"........
"........
"
"
" ....... oq.....
" ...... oq.....
" ~........
" ..... .... n.
. .......,....,...
-""""""--
. .....uwr--
039-00
-""-
.-.....-
. ---.....-
. ...--""-
040-00
...-. ~ --
:~ g.......-:=
........" ........
.___-'-~-. ...,....4:
-- .-
PRbJECf DATA:
I
L
041-00
-:::"l_a
...- \---'
~..::
--
...
PERIMETER 42
SETBACK LlNE-'
042-00
-'
~
-'
......
........
r_
\-,...
.........
~"4
(,." .~~
.. ...
LAND~E SCHEDULE
, ..
'2.00
001-00
City of Bremerton
Department of Community Development
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
PROPOSAL: Preliminary Planned Unit DevelopmenU plat to divide SF-3 and MF
zoned parcels into 70 lots plus open space and road tracts; and to
construct 70 detached single-family dwellings, a tot lot, a roofed sports
court and 18 guest parking spaces on 9.45 acres of land; and to grade
approximately 20,000 yards of earth and import another 2,600 yards of
material
FILE NUMBER: BP04-00404
LOCATION:
Eastside of Pine Road, approximately 200 feet south of Roswell Drive
PROPONENT: Jerry Clark
LEAD AGENCY: Department of Community Development
The SEPA Responsible. Official of the City of Bremerton hereby makes the following
Findings and Conclusions based upon a review of the Environmental Checklist,
comments received in response to the Notice of Application issued on April 27, 2005,
other information on file with the City of Bremerton, and the policies, plans and
regulations designated by the City of Bremerton as a basis for the exercise of
substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
pursuant to RCW 43.21 C.060.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. The applicant submitted an application for a 70-unit Planned Unit Development! plat
on February 9, 2005. The proposal includes about 1.3 acres of open space, a sports
court building, tot lot and other improvements. The proposal will clear more than 5
acres of trees.
2. Heath & Associates prepared a traffic impact analysis for the proposal and
concluded that the future traffic generated by the project would not be expected to
create major increases in delay for key intersection approaches. J.B. Engineering
consultants prepared a preliminary storm drainage plan for the project. A final storm
plan will be required for plat approval.
3. Myers Biodynamics prepared a Bald Eagle Nest Determination to evaluate a
potential bald eagle nest on the site and concluded there were no bald eagle nests
on the property.
4. Notification was mailed to state agencies and property owners within 300 feet of the
property on April 27, 2005. Legal notice was published in The Sun newspaper and
posted on the property on April 27, 2005. Comments were received from the
Department of Natural Resources and the Kitsap County Health District.
5. The proposal will have no significant impact on animals, water, noise, environmental
health, public services or land use.
6. No significant historic or cultural resources have been identified within the proposed
project site.
CONCLUSIONS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
The Responsible Official concludes that the proposal does not have a probable
significant impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement is not
required pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.030(2)(c). This decision is made after a review of the
completed Environmental Checklist, other information in the file with the City of
Bremerton, and existing regulations. This information is available to the public upon
request.
This Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) is issued after using the optional DNS
process in WAC 197-11-355. There is no further comment period on the DNS.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Soils used as borrow materials must be "clean," as defined in the Kitsap County
Board of Health (KCBH) Ordinance 2004-2 "Solid Waste Regulations."
. . .soils which are not a dangerous waste or problem waste. Problem waste includes
the following:
. . .soils removed during the cleanup of a remedial action site, a dangerous waste
closure, other cleanup efforts, or other actions which contain hazardous substances,
but are not dangerous wastes;
. . .dredge spoils from the dredging of surface waters of the state where contaminants
are present in the dredge spoils at concentrations not suitable for open water
disposal and the dredge spoils are not a dangerous waste and are not regulated by
Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (PL 95-217); or
. . . waste abrasive blasting grit or other materials used in abrasive blasting that may
contain, but is not limited to, silica, utility slag or copper slag. Waste abrasive
blasting grit does not include blasting grit that will be reused for its intended
purpose. . .
2. The applicant must ensure either by process knowledge or by testing, that fill
material is not contaminated. This would include the applicant's knowledge of the
presence of industrial/commercial facilities, prior disposal activities, or other activities
that may have contaminated the material to be used as fill.
3. Only suitable materials shall be used as fill. Suitable fill does not include vegetative
organic matter, demolition or construction wastes, or other debris, except as
provided by the Uniform Building Code (1994).
4. The applicant shall use all appropriate measures to control roadway carry-on or
fugitive dust from excavation activities or materials transportation activities necessary
to protect public health and the environment.
2
5. All construction-trenching activities conducted within 1,000 feet of an active or closed
landfill should test for the presence of methane gas and take those safety or
engineering precautions necessary for the protection of human health and the
environment.
6. A Forest Practice Application will be required at the time trees are removed/
harvested as set forth in RCW 76.09 and WAC 222.
7. During the course of work on the property if regulated wetlands, streams and/or
drainage courses are identified that might be potentially significantly adversely
impacted, additional mitigation may be required in order to comply with the City of
Bremerton's Critical Land Ordinance (BMC Chapter 21.22).
8. If any artifacts are uncovered, the Bremerton Planning and Building Department
(360) 478-5275 or the State Historic Preservation Office in Olympia (360) 753-4405
must be notified.
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
Christopher R. Hugo, Director
Department of Community Development
City of Bremerton
345 Sixth Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, W A 98337-1873
STAFF CONTACT:
DATE OF ISSUE:
DATE OF PUBLICATION:
APPEAL DEADLINE:
Robert Grumbach, (360) 473-5379
May 26,2005
May 26, 2005
June 9, 2005
I'
~ --:,'/ /
" ~ .1
i... "'::F" . ~Lu ~;"'. ):f.:::,:.; . .
Ch'ristopl1er R. Hugo, Responsible Official
.' ;1
APPEALS: Pursuant to RCW 43.21C.075 and City of Bremerton environmental regulations (BMC
Chapter 21.12.210), decisions of the Responsible Official may be appealed. Appeals must be
filed by a person with standing with the appropriate fees at the Department of Community
Development located at the Bremerton Permit Center, 286 Fourth Street, Bremerton, 98337.
Appeals must be filed by the date indicated above as "Appeal Deadline." If you appeal, you
should be prepared to make specific factual objections.
NOTE: The issuance of this DNS does not constitute project approval. The applicant must
comply with all other applicable requirements of the City of Bremerton and the State of
Washington.
3
03/14/2005 11:47
SOUNDVIEW PARK
2538586208
PAGE 02
:.~....
Myer!i
BiodgnaDlic!i inc.
~~ ,l:'COtcchniCllI engineering. coasl..1 pr(l(:t'l'.'Il:~ . biological scicnCt~
,-
March 3, 2005
Mr. Jerry Clark
BrandyWine Company Inc.
5775 ~oundview Dr. ste l04A
Gig Harbor, W A 98335 '
Re: Bald Eagle Nest Determination .
Proposed Brandywine Property Development
Bremerton, Washi~gton
Dear Mr. Clark::
At your request, we Visited the subject property 'known as the Brandywine Development
located along Pine Road in Bremetton, Washington. We undefSitand a local resident
.recently raised concerns over the potential presence of a possiblEl,bald eagle's nest
supported by a large big leaf maple tree lOcated within the property boundary. We
subsequently visited the site to evaluate the probability the identified nest was .
constructed by a bald eagle.
The subject property is approximately ten acre~ and is an aband(med homestead bordered
by Pine Road NE to the west and several small housing developments to the north and
S9uth. The general nest area is positioned in the northeastern 'portion of the site and
consists ora mosaic oftrcc species, Douglas fir bejng the most dominant. There are
remnant old growth Douglas firs (80-120 years) and big leaf maples (80-100 years)
present within a mixed conifer -hardwood forest canopy thht predominantly contains
Dougl8$ fir and big leaf maple with lesser amounts of western red cedar, pine sp., and
Indian plum. The ground cover .within the site consists predominantly of a mPttln'e of
sword fem;Oregon grape,salal, and blackberry.
The purpose of our work is to. detennine whether the bird nest in question located on the
proposed ~randywine Development site is associated with bald c:agle activity at the site. '
Our wodc.was conducted on March 2, 2005 and included an on-site visit to locate the
identified nest tree and pe..rorm field observations.
OBSERVATJONS
. .
The following summary presents our observations regarding the :identified nest structure
at the Brandywine Property.
l<OLLlNO BA Y MF.RCANTIl.F m.il! DINe; 11254 ~UNKISE DRIVE AAINRRIOGE ISI.,AND. WASH1NC,TON l'~11O . 21i(,,);"l:l.110T\
it
"".
I
.
')..,
t
~
03/14/2005 11:47
2538586208
SOUNDVIEW PARK
). The nest in question was located approximately 60 feet hi gh in the crotch of an
auxiliary branch supported away from the main trunk. of the tree near the top of a
70 foot tall big leaf maple. The upper branches appear to have grown over the
crown of the nest. There is a Jack of forest canopy swroUJlding the nest tree and i~
is not among the most dominant trees in the area. Bald engle's .typically. seJect the
tallest live tree for nestiD.g and place their nests below the top of the tree. .
. ".. The nest measured approximately 2 - 2.5 feet in diameter and consists of S1ll811 to
mediwn sized stick materials no larger than 1/2 - 3/4 inches in diameter and
appeared very weathered. Bald eagles typically construct nests with much larger
and stronger ma~rial$ and add to their nests each subsequent nesting season.
Bald eagle nests must be sturdy enough to support the weight of both adults and
their young. The size oftbis nest appears barely able to acx:ommodate.a single
adult eagle and is not located' on the sturdiest of branches or the most protected
location within the tree.. '. .
".. The condition of the materials and general poor appearance of the nest suggest
that it may be abandoned by the nest builderS. Further analyses would be needed
to make this determmation. '.Observations of the surrounding forest floor and base
area of the nest tree disclosed no feathers, bone fragment:J, white wash, or pieCes
of prey iteII\s.
".. A cursory scaD of the surrounding trees found an ~dditiorlal nest located
approximately SO feet to the northwest in a small 20-30 year old Douglas fir tree
at a height of approximately 6S feet. This nest looks slightly larger (2.5 feet in
diameter) and is located in the middle of the crown next to the tnIidc. This nest is
similar in construction to the first nest, however~ does not appear as weathered.
Additio.nal observations of the surtOWlding forest floor id.entified a weathered sea
shell (possibly snail sp.).
".. No large, bird presence was.detected in or around any of the mature Douglas firs '
in the nest vicinity at the time of our field Qbservation.
CONCLUSION
I
Bas.eti? o~ Oufth pnn11' dscary obsehrvatio~ti~ oftrefehspecies s~~~tethd ~dth.:'fineedst buildther, tJ.te treeftb ...'....,
paS); on In e an ape, t e poSI on 0 t e nest WI e 1 enti. tree, e S1Ze 0 e r
~est, and the composition of nest materials, we observed no evidence to associate the , _
identified nest with bald eagles'. Secondarily, the absence of dire:ct association of bald f
. eagJes with the nest (one visit) during the b!oedinl\ seoson and the fact tb8t the identified · . ~ .
nest is not known to fall within.any known eagle territory provides additional support that
the identified nest does not appear to be associated with bald eagles.' Our conclusions are
restri.cted tocomrnentary on the association of the identified nest with bald eagles. . No j
other assertions are iot~or implied. j
Bald Eagle Nest Determincz/ion
Brtmdywlne Deve/optrl4nt
Bremenon. Washington
I
ProjeCt No. OS/2Jl-:
, March 3. 20ti
Myers Biodynamics, 1.1:
pp~ 2of3
PAGE 03
t
,
I
ill
ft~~'
I I
03/14/2005 11:47
SOUNDVIEW PARK'
2538586208
CLOSURE
This report.was prepared for the exclusive use of Mr. Jerry Carle for specific application
to the Brandywine Development The conclusions and interprets~tions within this repOrt
should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions.
Within the limits 'of scc)pe, schedule, and 'budget the evaluation and recommendations
presented in this letter were prepared in general accordance with accepted professional
wildlife biology practices in this area at the time the letter was prepared. No other .
warranty, whether expressed or implied is made. The evaluation presented herein was
based on our observations of the subject property at the time of our site visits.
. .
If there is a substantial lapse of time, conditions have ch~~ at the site, or if conditions
appear different from tlrose described in this report, -we should ~: contacted and retained
to review the ch8nied. conditions. The purpose of the review is to determine the
applicabillty of the conSiderations and recommendations present~~ in this report
considering the ~e lapse andlorchanged C9nditions.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of assistance to you.' If you have any questions
reg~g the observations' and conclusion presented above or WE: can be of ftirther
~sistance, please feel :free to call.
Sincerely Yours, ,
MYERS BIODYNAMl.CS, INC.
f~-
Rian Myers. P.W$.
Prindpal Biologist
Jonathan Oleyar
Project Wildlife Biologist
JBO:esw '
Bald eaRle Nest Detcrmilwt;Qn
8rondyWifle Development .
BremerlQn, W t;lSf,iflgtrm
Project NQ. OJ/1J/-8
Marcia 3, 2005
Myers Biodynomic5, '1nc
pagd (If 3
PAGE 04
I
*!,
I
..
,.
J
H~
I
,
,
i
-~
,
,
i
I'
.
,
,
~t. of r.nm'1';lP-~ Of'!VP.lnpmP-nt* 2At1 ",$ A~ .. 'R1"f"1nP.rlnn .. VIA. 98~~'"
(360) 478-5275 .. Fax (360) 478-5278
WAC 197-U-96f) EuvlronmeDtaI checklist.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHBCKlJST,
Purpose 01 chsclcllst:
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to
consider the enviroDmentaI impacts of a proposal befOre making decisions. An environmental impact statement (BIS)
must be prepared for all proposals with probable stgJIificsmt adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The
pmpose ofdris checkUst is to provide information to help you and the agency identifY impacls from YOlD' proposal (and
to reduce or avoid impacts ftom the proposal. if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an BIS is
required.
Instructions for oppliconIs:
This enviro~ checklist asks you to describe some basic infurmatiOl1 about your proposal. Governmental
agencies use this checklist to detennine whelher the envi:romnen1al impacls of your proposal are significant, ooquiring
preparation of an BIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best
description you can.
You must answer each question accurate.ly and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you
should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to lUre experts. If
you really do not know 1he answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not
apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid uoneces88l'Y delays 1*.
Some questions ask about govenuneotaI. regulations, such as 7DDiDg, shoreline, and landmark designations.
AnsweI' tbese questions if you can. If you have prObtams, the govamnc:PtaI ageneies can assist you.
The checklist questions apply CO aD p8l1s: of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time
or on different paroe1s of land. Auacb any additional infurmation that will help describe your proposal or its
environmental e1fects. The agency to which you submit this cbeck:Jist may ask you to explain your answers or provide
additional informadon reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact.
. Use qf chec/dist for nonproject proposals:
Complete lbis cbeckllst for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply."
IN ADDITION. complete die SUPPLEMBNTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACfiONS (part D).
For lIDDpJ'Oject actions, the references in the checIdist to the wonts 1Iproject," "applicant," and Hproperty or
site" should be read as "proposal, d "proposer," and daftbcted geographic 8Rl8, " respectively .
J._ R.A.ClCltJonND
I. NlUIle of proposed project, ifapplicable:
PRELIMINARY PLAT / P.U.D OF BRANDYWINE
2. Name ofappHeant: Jerry Clark
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Applicant: Jerry Clark Contact: William. M. Palmer, WoM. PALMER CONSULTANfS
5775 Soundview Dr., # 104A P.O. Box 6, Port Orchard, Washington 98366
[253] 858-6202 Tel: [360] 769-2434 * Fax: [253] 858-3654
v
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
4. Date checIdist prepared:
S. Agency requesting checklist:
October 14. 200A
City of Bremerton Planning & Building Department
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, ifappHcable):
Proposal is to start construction within 9 months
7. Do you have any plans fur futme additions, expausion, or :fin1her activity related to or oonnected with this
proposal? If yes, explain.
No
8. List any environmen1al infonnation you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared. directly related
to this proposal.
None
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmen1al approvals of other proposals directly affecting
the property covered by your proposal? If yes. explain.
No
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed fur your proposal. if known.
Preliminary and Final Plat'Approval
Building Permit approval for construction of homes
II. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site.
There are several questions later in Ibis checklist that ask you to descn1Je certain aspects of your proposal. You
do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modifY this form to include additional
specific information on project description.)
Proposal is to develop 70 lots on the 9.45 acre site. Also, there will be 13.02% common
open space set aside for the benefit of the lot owners and their families. Part of that open
space will include play fields, a tot lot, informal picnic area and a covered sport court
with an attached picnic shelter to allow for all weather recreation activities. Eighteen
guest parking spaces will be provided in addition to the 2- spaces per lot of off-street
parking. The road right-of-way proposed is 50 feet and the internal street will have
sidewalks on both sides.
WAC (5/t5/98)
Page 2
[Chapter 197-1I-WAC -- P.5-64]
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information fur a person to unders1and the pteCise location of your
proposed project, including a street add:ress, if any, and section, township, and 1'IIDge, if known. If a proposal
would occur over a raose of area, provide the rauge or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description. site
plan, vlchIity map, and topographic map, if reasonably awiJable. WhDe you should submit any plans required
by the agency, you are DOt requiJed to duplicare maps or detailed plaos submitted witb any pennit applications
re1ated to this cber-Jrlillt
Site is located on the east side of Pine Road approximately 200 feet
south of R6swell Drive. See attached site plan & vicinity map.
I. Eartb
a. G~ description of the site (circ1e one): F~Iy, steep slopes.
mountainous, other. . . !
b. What is dIe steepest slope on the site (approxJmate percent slope)?
BY ALVA nON FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
B.
ENVIRllNMRNT......ltI.RMFNrS
Approx. 12%
c. What general types of soils are foWld on the site (for example, clay ,sand, gravel,
~ Kapowsin Variant - A gravely clay loam type soil
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specifY them and note
any prime
fiInnland.
NA
d. Are there surfilCe indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity?
Ifso, describe.
No
e. Describe the purpose, type, and appJ'Qximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source offill. .
The site will be regarded to even out the slopes.
Approximately 20,000 cubic yds. Of material will be
Moved. Another 2,600 cubic yds. Of material will be
Imported from local gravel pits to provide road base.
r. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
Only minimally.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfilces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
22.77 % fot streets and another 40% in the lot areas.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or oon1rol erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
any:
WAC (5/15/98)
Provision of open space and landscaping in and around houses.
Page 3 [Chapter 197~1l-WAC- P.5-64]
TOBE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
2. Air
EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
a. What types of emissions to the air would result ftom the proposal (ie., dust,
au1omobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when Ihe
project is completed? If any. generally describe and give approximate quantities if
known.
Auto emmissions from vehicles circulating within the site.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal?
If so. generally descn'be.
Yes. Vehicle emissions from the traffic on Pine Road.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, ifany:
None are proposed or appear warranted given the nature
of the project.
3. Water
a. Surtace:
J) Is tbere any surtiwe water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site
(including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater. lakes, ponds, wetlands)?
If yes, descnbe type and provide names. If appropriate, stare what stream or
river it flows into.
No.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the
described waters? If yes. please descnbe and attach available plans.
No.
3) Estimate the amount of fiU and dredge material tbat would be placed in or
removed fiom surface vvater or wetlands and indicate dIe area of the site thai
would be affected Indicate tile source of fill material.
NA.
4) Will the proposal require sur18cc water withdrawals or diversions? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities ifknown.
No.
WAC (5115/98)
Page 4
[Chapter 197-11-WAC- P.5-64]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANf
BV ALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
S) Does the proposal fie within a lOO-year floodplain? If so, n01ll1ocation on 1IIe
site plan.
No.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges ofWlWte materials to sur1ice waters?
If so, describe the type ofwaste and anticipafed wJume of discbalge.
No.
b. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water?
Give general desaiptiOll, purpose, and approximate quantities ifknown.
No.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into tho ground ftom septic tanks
or other souroes, if any (ror example: Domestic sewage; iodusfriaI, conlaining
the following chemica1s. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the
system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if
applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to
serve.
Project will be served by City Sewer
C. Wafer runoff (including Btonnwater):
I) Describe the source ofruno1f(includiog storm WIder) and method of collection
and ~ if any ("mcJode quantities, ifknown). Where will this water flow?
Will this water flow into other watem? If so, describe.
Project site will include a stormwater detention system, which
will outfall into the City's Storm water collection system.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surfilce waters? If so, genendly deseribe.
No. The will be removed prior to exiting the site.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and nmotfwater impacts, if any:
Compliance with City's Stormwater control regulations.
WAC (5/15/98)
Page 5
[Chapter 197-Il-WAC- P.5-64}
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
4. Plants
a. Check or circle types ofvegetation fuund on the site:
~- --~~--
x: evergreen ~U~~. iDe, other
K shrubs ~n.i ~
X'
" grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soD pJan1s: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water my. eelgrass, miIfoil, other
othertypesofvcgetation
b, WIIat kind and amount of vegetatiOn will be removed or altered?
Most all existing vegetation will be removed except a few large trees.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
None have been found on the site.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants. or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
A mix of evergreen and decidious trees and shrubs as will as grass & lawns.
5. Animals
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be
on or near the site:
birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds. othbr:
mammals: deer. bear. elk. beaver, other: .
fish: bass, salmon, trout, berrio& sheUfish. other:
b. List any tbreafened or endangered species Jmown to be on or near the site.
None have been observed on the site.
c. Is the siIe part of a migration route? If so, explain.
No.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
None are proposed or appear warranted given the nature of the proposal.
WAC (5/J 5/98)
Page 6
{Chapter I 97-11-WAC - P.5-64}
!
I
!
!
I
!
I
!
I
I
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
i
!
I
!
I
I
I
I
EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
6. Energy and _tonl resources
a What kinds of energy (eleclric. natural gas. oil. wood stove, solar) will be used to meet
the wmpleted project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating.
maoufiloturin& ere.
Primary heat source will be natural gas. Electricity will be bsed for lights.
b. Would your plQject affect the potential use of solar energy by actiacent properties?
If so, generally describe.
No.
c. What kinds of eoersY conservation features 8J1l included in the plans of this proposal?
Ust other proposed measures to reduce or control energy im.pacIs, if 8DY:
None other than canpliance with building and energy coedes.
7. EnviroDlDeJltal health
a Are thele any eoviromnental heahb haztIros, iocJudJJJa exposure to toxic chemicals, risk
of fire and explosion, spill, or ba:zardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal?
If50, describe.
No.
t ) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
None are anticipated.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, ifany:
!
None are proposed or appear Warranted given the nature of the proposal.
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example:
traffic, equipment, operation, other)?
Short ter.m construction noise - moving dirt and framing houses.
Long tenn - noise associated with single family housing projects.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with 1I1e project on a
sbort-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, opemtion, other)?
Indicate what holU'S noise would come :from the site. .
See response to b. 1) above.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts. ifany:
None are proposed or appear warranted given the nature of the proposal.
WAC (5/15/98)
Page 7
[Chapter 197-Il-WAC- P.5-64)
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
8. Land and shoreline use
a. What is the current use of tile site and adjacent properties?
Site is vacant.
b. Has dte site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
N.o.
c. Descn'be any structures on the site.
None.
d. Will any s1ructures be demolished? If so, what?
NA.
e. What is the cwrent mningclassifica1ion of the site?
Urban Low, and Multiple Family Residential
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
Urban Low and Medium .Dem~ityResli:dential.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of1he site?
NA.
b. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specifY.
No.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
180 - 190
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, ifany:
NA.
1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
EV ALUA nON FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
Project Proposal complies with the comprehensive plan & zoning.
WAC (5/15/98)
Page 8
[Chapter 197-1I-WAC- P.5-64J
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
BV ALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
9. Koosillg
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid.
dIe, or low-income housing.
70 Single-family homes Median income homes:':;
b. Approximately how many units, ifany, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high.
middle, or low-income housing.
None.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts. if any:
None are proposed or appear warranted given 'the nature of the proposal.
10. A.estlaetics
a. What is the lallest height of any proposed structure(s). not including antennas; what is
the principal exterior building matelial(s) proposed?
Many of the houses will fall in the 25' - 28' height range, but some may have peak
heights as high as 35'.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
None.
c. Proposed tneasW'es to redu.ce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
None are proposed or appeac warranted given the nature of the proposal.
11. Light md glare
a. What type of light or glare will tho proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur? i
Street lighting, exterior lighting around homes and glare from
vehicle glass and sanetimes fram glass iIlithe hames.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
Not likely.
c. What existing off-site SOUl'<JeS ofllgbt or glare may aftect your proposal?
Lights fram vehicles circulating on Pine Road.
d. Proposed measmes to redllce or controlligbt and glare impacts. ifany:
None are proposed or appear warranted given the nature of the proposal.
WAC (5/15/98)
Page 9
[Chapter J97-11-WAC- P.5-64]
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
12. Recreation
a. What ~ted and informal rette8tionaJ opportunities are in the immediate vicinity1
approximately 2 miles to the south is Lyons Park
b. Would 1he proposed project displace any existing reCreatiouaI uses? If so, describe.
No.
c. Proposed IIIC8SURS to reduce or cootroI impacts on nlCre8tion, including recreation op-
portunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Approx. 13.02% of the site will be set aside for; common open space. Of that
amount, approximately 50,000 S.F. of area can be ~sed for active recreation.
13. Historic ao.d mltural preservation '
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for. national, state. or locaJ pl't'Servation
registers known to be on or next to the SiUl? If so. generaJly describe.
None.
b. Gene.ra.l1y describe any landmarlcs or evidence of historic, arobaeologica~ scientific, or
cuIturaJ importance bOWD to be on or next to the site.
None have been found on the site or in the immediate vicinity.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impaots, jf any:
None are proposed or appear warranted given the nature of the proposal.
14. Transportation
a. ldeatiJY public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the
existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
,
Pine Road. One access point ~s proposed on pine Road. See Site Plan.
b. Is site CIJI'leDtIy served by public tnmsit'1 If not. what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop?
No. About a block to the south of the site.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
Two per lot and 18 guest spots for a total of 158 spaces.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads Or
streels, not including driveways'! If so, generaUy describe (indicate whether public or
private~
No. See attached traffic report.
WAC (5/15/98)
Page 10
[Chapter 197-1 l-W AC - P. 5-64J
TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
EVALUATION FOR
AGENCY USE ONLY
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail.. or air 1ranSp0118tion'i'
Ifso. generally describe.
No.
f: How many vehicuJar trips per day would be generated by the completed project? [fknown,
indicate when peak volwnes would occur.
See attached traffic reporte
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control1ransportatioo impaoIs. if any:
None are proposed other than as called for in the traffic report.
15. pubnt services
a. Would the project result in an increased na:d for public services (for example: fire pr0-
tection, police protection. health care. schools, other)? If so,. generally describe.
All new development represents a need for increased public services
although there is not a specific feature of the proposal requiring such a need.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacls on publW services, if any.
Compliance with regulations imposed by the City of Bremerton.
b. Describe the utilities that 8Rl proposed for the project, the utility providing the service,
and Ihe general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be
needed.
The new homes will need electric service, natural gas, sanitary sewer
cammections and public water service. All are available to the site.
c. SlONATURB
The ~ aw:wers are true and oomplete.~ the best of my knowledge. I understan'~ the Ief ~~ .';
agency relying on them to ~ its d~~..<. ..;;,.... f.i j__, () II
. . ' i ~':-'>j \) Q "'~": L .4> SLL.i,ll\\ l"~ l;;\ly\/\-.....hiy.,tc'/ ( )/f\!Jl'j~:t/
Signature. ......... .......,1.\,...,1........." .i.?7.."......~...f.... . Ji~........1>..~'tr...f.:'. M\.-i..'..., ."":.~f....."rf>.. ... ..'1'.... ....,..... ...... , ".. . ""
.,,' ..~..~ ' i". {,
D '. t' ,,:" '.J if L I
ate Subtnitted. .........ffi'...~\'. ..~~~ ......................1Y............................... \...~.......................
&' '>> (>> \. ~ ,,-,i
\A] Ji,,/ '-J.
WAC (5/15/98)
Page 1]
[Chapter 191-11-WAC - P.5---641
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
BILL # 1)5'-11(8
DATE SUBMITTED: 6-9-2005
1A
.........................m...............U...R..........................................
SUBJECT: Approval of Professional
Services Agreement with RDG Planning &
Design for Phase II for completion of
construction documents, design for
casework, and exhibit displays for Building
50 Museum and it's immediate surroundings
and completion of construction documents
for Harborside Memorial Plaza.
Committee Meeting Date: June 15,2005
COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 6, 2005
Department: Economic
Development
Presenter: Gary Sexton
Phone: 473-5282
SUMMARY: Staffis recommending that the City of Bremerton enter into a professional services
agreement with RDG Planning & Design for Phase II of the Maritime Park Naval Museum, also
known as Building 50. Phase II includes completion of the architect's instrument of service; the
construction documents of Building 50 and it's immediate surroundings resulting in the adaptive reuse
into a museum building. Phase II also incudes all the build-out including design for casework,
cabinets, counters and exhibit display items. Additionally, Phase II includes the completion of
construction documents for Harborside Memorial Plaza. Phase II compensation not to exceed
$520,000.
A TT ACHMENTS: Professional Services Agreement
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): 1:wc\.v6,e-a \ l". ~k tv\""....~.\~ / QJv: td/'\I\..-,\ -SO
'o\Jc.\~fL. -\-.
APPROV ALS: ,I'
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
FISCAL/BUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT:
4t. ~-7P-:"-
't?t~c~ .,..~~
j)~ ~~
,
CONSENT AGENDA f-
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve the Professional Services Agreement with RDG Planning & Design for Phase
II of the Maritime Park Naval Museum and Memorial Plaza and authorize the Mayor to
execute the agreement in substantially the same form as presented.
COUNCIL ACTION: 0 Approve 0 Deny D Table
o Continue 0 No Action
:g..",..,
~. ..,. ....'
page 1
13 May 2005
PHASE II
ADDENDUM
Mr. Gary Sexton
Director of Economic Development
City of Bremerton
345 6th Street, 5th Floor
Bremerton, WA 98337
Re: Professional Services Agreement
Project: Harborside Heritage Museum
RDG Project Number: 24111.01 and 24111.02
Dear Mr. Sexton:
If accepted, this proposal document is an addendum of the Building 50/Naval Museum
Professional Services Agreement previously dated February 14, 2005 between the City of
Bremerton, Washington, and RDG Planning and Design. This agreement covers Phase
II of the Bldg 50 museum. Phase II is completion of the architect's instrument of service;
the construction documents of Building 50 and it's immediate surroundings resulting in the
adaptive reuse into a museum building. Phase II includes all the build-out including
design for casework, cabinets, counters and exhibit display items. Phase III is the
implementation of the interpretive plan including plan for specific exhibits in Building 50.
Phase II also includes, as a separate line item, the completion of construction documents
for Harborside Memorial Plaza.
The scope of work for RDG Planning & Design in Phase II includes Building 50, the
proposed addition presented in Phase I, and it's immediate environment at the southwest
corner of the intersection of Pacific Street and 1st Street.
The scope of services is based on a construction budget of $3,500,000 (three million five
hundred thousand dollars) for Building 50, including design and incorporation of Navy
design repair work in the sum of 1.5 million, and construction documents for the proposed
services addition. Updated conceptual cost estimates will be provided at each phase.
Fees under this agreement shall not exceed $520,000.
Scope of Services Phase /I-Museum:
1. Design and coordination of construction document needs for NAVFAC regarding
the changes needed to Building 50 for transfer of the property from NA VF AC to the
City of Bremerton as outlined in the BESS document dated 21 April 2005 by SL
Sparks.
2. Completion of Construction Documents for the remainder of Building 50 for
conversion into a museum based on RDG museum design guidelines.
RDG Planning & Design 900 Farnam Street, Suite 100
Omaha, Nebraska 68102
402-392-0133
www.rdgusa.com
'g..
Scope of Services Phase /I-Memorial Plaza:
1. Design and coordination of construction documents for the memorial plaza with
other designated consultants involved in the ferry terminal traffic tunnel.
2. Completion of Construction Documents for the memorial plaza.
3. Coordination with PSNY for artifacts to be incorporated.
4. Design and coordination and implementation of downtown Bremerton streetscape
plan as it relates to the area of the memorial plaza.
Scope does not include Construction Administration, which will be held under a separate
agreement once Phase III Exhibit Design is contracted. The estimated hours and fees
represent a percentage of construction costs and shall be amended according to
construction costs, capital funding changes, phased construction, or delays in
construction starts beyond twenty-four months.
Estimated Hours:
Museum:
The estimate for the hours involved in Phase II:
Please refer to Attachment A, rate schedule
The maximum cost of the architect's work shall
not exceed $375,000.
4,500
Memorial Plaza:
The estimate for the hours involved in Phase II:
Please refer to Attachment A, rate schedule
The maximum cost of the architect's work shall
not exceed $100,000
1,125
Estimated Travel and Expenses:
Travel and related expenses of Phase"
Shall not exceed:
$75,000
(authorized signatures)
Gary Sexton, City of Bremerton John A Sova, RDG Planning & Design
. RDG Planning & Design 900 Farnam Street, Suite 100 www.rdgusa.com
Omaha, Nebraska 68102
402-392-0133
DATE SUBMITTED: June 7, 2005
BILL # IJ ~.,.. I" c;
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
1~
........................................................................................
SUBJECT: Resolution No. ~L
approving boundary line adjustments and
authorizing quit claim deeds to property
owners adjacent to City property
Committee Meeting Date: June 29, 2005
COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 6, 2005
Department: Parks & Recreation
Presenter: Ken Mickelsen
Phone: 473-5752
SUMMARY: The City performed a preliminary boundary survey of City property commonly known
as the Capital Hill Fire Station and Forest Ridge Park and discovered that adjacent residential property
owners have encroached onto the property. In order to resolve this issue, staff is proposing to sell to
the residential property owners the City property they have encroached onto. The attached boundary
line adjustments and quit claim deeds will resolve the encroachment issues and establish new
boundaries for the Capital Hill Fire Station and Forest Ridge Park.
ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Resolution; Boundary Line Adjustments; Quit Claim Deeds; Capital
Hill Survey N~. <<17/
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): \.h.~C<_\;\~\cao.\~~
~"~\~t 0..;) \... ~~ c.-...\-\~Q..._~~--'Q"'~ ~.
...\ '.. i h'~\\
<f"Q..vQ N"'~S --""-. ~ '" -
APPROVALS:
DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
FINANCE DIRECTOR:
MAYOR:
FISCAL/BUDGET:
OPERATIONS:
COUNCIL PRESIDENT:
CONSENT AGENDA D
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to pass Resolution No. d97/ approving the
boundary line adjustments and authorizing the Mayor to execute quit claim deeds in favor of the
residential property owners adjacent to the Capital Hill Fire Station and Forest Ridge Park properties.
COUNCIL ACTION: D Approve D Deny D Table
R:\LEGAL\Departments-General\Parks\Capital Hill Fire Station BLA.ab.doc
D Continue D No Action
RESOLUTION NO. <<9"'_
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, approving boundary line adjustments and
authorizing quit claim deeds to certain residential property owners
adjacent to City property commonly known as the Capital Hill Fire
Station and Forest Ridge Park.
WHEREAS, City staff recently performed a preliminary boundary survey
of City property commonly known as the Capital Hill Fire Station and Forest ridge Park
and discovered that adjacent residential property owners have encroached onto City
property; and
WHEREAS, City Council desires to approve boundary line adjustments and
authorize quit claim deeds in favor of the property owners in order to resolve the encroachment
issue; and
WHEREAS, the City will be compensated by each property owner receiving a
quit claim deed for the value of the property based on the County's assessed valuation of the
property; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated as if set forth
herein in full.
SECTION 2. The boundary line adjustments attached hereto as Exhibit A are
hereby approved.
SECTION 3. The Mayor is authorized to execute quit claim deeds and all other
documents necessary to implement the boundary line adjustments and complete the transfers.
SECTION 4. Severability. If anyone or more sections, subsections, or
sentences of this Resolution are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution and the same shall remain in full
force and effect.
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force
immediately upon its passage.
day of
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this _
,2005.
DAREN NYGREN, Council President
I
Boundary Line Adjustments
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney
R:\LEGAL\Resolutions\Parks\Boundary Line Adjustments.doc
ATTEST:
PAULA JOHNSTON, City Clerk
2
Boundary Line Adjustments
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Bremerton City Clerk
345 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington 98337
Grantor:
City of Bremerton
Grantee(s): Thomas Cameron, Kent Mercer, Tammy Crawley, Richard Chrisinger, and Duane and
Margaret Baker
Abbreviated Legal Description: Portion ofthe SE lf4 and the SW lf4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 15,
T. 24 N., R. I E., W.M., Kitsap County, Washington
Assessor's Tax Parcel ID No(s). 3733-001-001-0005, 3733-001-002-0004, 3733-001-008-0008,
3733-001-009-0007, 152401-4-022-2006, and 152401-4-021-2007
DECLARATION OF BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT
This form allows for the adjustment of boundary lines within the limits of the City of
Bremerton. This adjustment shall not create any additional lot, tract, parcel or site. This document
does not convey ownership, separate quit claim deeds will be required to complete the Boundary
Line Adjustment. A subsequent survey of the adjusted line shall be recorded with Kitsap County
referencing this document.
Applicant:
City of Bremerton
Applicant's Mailing Address:
345 6th Street. Suite 600
Bremerton
City
Washington
State
98337
Zip
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 1 of 10
EXHIBIT A
Dec1arant(s)/Owners of Original Parcel(s):
Name Mailing Address City/State/Zip
City of Bremerton 345 6th Street. Suite 600 Bremerton. WA 98337
Thomas Cameron 348 Ford Avenue Bremerton. W A 98312
Kent Mercer 348 Ford Avenue Bremerton. WA 98312
Richard B. Chrisinger 911 S. Cavalier Drive Springfield. MO 65802-2758
Tammy L. Crawley 329 N. Lafayette Avenue Bremerton. W A 98312
Duane Baker (Trustee) P.O. Box 327 Bremerton. WA 98337
Margaret Baker (Trustee) P.O. Box 327 Bremerton. WA 98337
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this instrument as of the date
first above written.
DECLARANTS:
Cary Bozeman, Mayor ofBremerton
Thomas Cameron
Kent Mercer
Richard Chrisinger
Tammy Crawley
Duane Baker
Margaret Baker
(Notary Acknowledgement on Next Page)
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 2 of 10
STATE OF WASHINGTON
)
) ss.
COUNTY OF KITSAP
)
On this day of ,200_, before me a Notary Public
in and for the State of Washington, personally appeared , to
me known to be the individual that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the
free and voluntary act, for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that
they are authorized to execute said instrument.
-Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day
and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 3 of 10
STATE OF WASHINGTON
)
) ss.
COUNTY OF KITSAP
)
On this day of ,200_, before me a Notary Public
in and for the State of Washington, personally appeared , to
me known to be the individual that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the
free and voluntary act, for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that
they are authorized to execute said instrument.
-Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day
and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH
City Attorney
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 4 of 10
DECLARATION OF BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT
THIS DECLARATION MADE THIS day of ,2005 by the City
ofBremerton, A Declarant as owner ofthe real property described herein, and by Thomas Cameron,
Kent Mercer, Richard Chrisinger, Tammy Crawley, and Duane and Margaret Baker, Declarants as
owners of the real property legally described herein, who wish to adjust the common property line
between said parcels without creating any additional lot, tract, parcel or site.
CURRENT Legal description ofParcel(s):
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A"
NEW Legal Description ofParcel(s):
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B"
I, (We) the owner( s) of all the property described herein do hereby acknowledge and agree to
hold the City of Bremerton harmless in any cause of action arising out ofthe boundary line
adjustment or recordation of same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have set our signature(s) this
day of
,2005.
Owner
Owner
Owner
Owner
Owner
Owner
Owner
(Notary Acknowledgement on Next Page)
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 5 of 10
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
On this day of ,200_, before me a Notary Public in and
for the State of Washington, personally appeared , to me
known to be the individual that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the free
and voluntary act, for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that they
are authorized to execute said instrument.
-Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day
and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
On this day of , 200 , before me a Notary Public in and
for the State of Washington, personally appeared , to me
known to be the individual that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the free
and voluntary act, for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that they
are authorized to execute said instrument.
-Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day
and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
City oj Bremerton Boundary Lme Adjustment
Page 6 of 10
EXHIBIT A
Capital Hill Fire Station Site (City of Bremerton)
152401-4-022-2006
Forest Ridge Park (City of Bremerton)
152404-4-021-2007
Thomas Cameron and Kent Mercer
3733-001-001-0005
Richard Chrisinger
3733 -00 1-002-0004
Tammy Crawley
3733 -00 1-008-0008
Duane and Margaret Baker
3733-001-009-0007
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 7 of 10
EXHIBIT B
Capital Hill Fire Station
That portion ofthe southwest quarter ofthe southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E.,
W.M., Kitsap County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the northeast comer of said southwest quarter of the southeast quarter; thence
southerly along the east line of said southwest quarter of the southeast quarter to its intersection
with the southerly right of way of 6th Street; thence along said southerly right of way, N
88051 '09" W 5.54 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence leaving said southerly right of
way, S 1022'14" W 114.43 feet; thence on a curve to the right, the center of which bears N
88037'46" W 182.50 feet an arc distance of 40.64 feet; thence S 14007'42" W 113.00 feet; thence
on a curve to the right, the center of which bears N 75052'19" W 45.00 feet an arc distance of
212.06 feet; thence S 14007'42" W 5.00 feet; thence N 65049'06" W 143.10 to its intersection
with a line parallel to the east line of said southwest quarter of the southeast quarter and 200
westerly thereof; thence along said parallel line N 1016'41" E 150.00 feet to the said southerly
right of way of 6th Street; thence along said southerly right of way to the True Point of
Beginning.
Forest Ridge Park
That portion ofthe E Y2, SW ~, SW ~, SE 1/4 AND E Y2, SW ~, SE ~, situate in Section 15,
T.24N., R. 1 E., W.M., Kitsap County, Washington.
Except that portion of the said E Y2, SW~, SW~, SE ~ conveyed to the State of Washington
under Kitsap County Auditor File Number 9607300048, being more particularly described as
follows:
Beginning at the S ~ comer of said Section 15; thence N 1022' 19" E 667.86 feet along the
center section line to the NW comer of the SW~, SW~, SE ~ of said Section 15; thence S
88056'5" E 331.84 feet to the NW comer of the E Y2 of said SW ~ and the True Point of
Beginning; thence continuing along the north line of said SW1I4, S 88056'05" E 257.87 feet;
thence S 1023'14" W 475.25 feet; thence N 88056'05" W 257.81 feet; thence N 1022'47" E
475.25 feet to the True Point of Beginning;
Also except that portion of the SW ~ of the SE ~ of said Section 15 being more particularly
described as follows:
Beginning at the northeast comer of the said southwest quarter of the southeast quarter, also
being the True Point of Beginning; thence southerly along the east line of said southwest quarter
of the southeast quarter to its intersection with the southerly right of way of 6th Street; thence
continuing along said east line to the southwest comer of Lot 10, Block 1 of the plat of First
Addition to Charleston, as recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kit sap
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 8 of 10
County, Washington; thence leaving said east line N 76006'10" W 51.01 feet; thence on a curve
to the right, the center of which bears N 39043'43" W 45.00 feet an arc distance of 183.67 feet;
thence S 14007'42" W 5.00 feet; thence N 65049'06" W 143.10 to its intersection with a line
parallel to the east line of said southwest quarter of the southeast quarter and 200 westerly
thereof; thence along said parallel line N 1022' 14" E 150.00 feet to the said southerly right of
way of 6th Street; thence along said southerly right of way to the True Point of Beginning.
Also except for the north 30 feet of the said E Y2 of the SW ~ of the SE ~ for road.
Thomas Cameron and Kent Mercer
That portion ofthe southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M., Kitsap County,
Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Lot 1 and the North 20 feet of Lot 2, Block 1 of the plat of First Addition to Charleston, as
recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kit sap County, Washington;
Together with a portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 15
described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest comer of said Lot 1 and the True Point of Beginning; thence N
88051'09" W 5.54 feet; thence S 1022'14" W 50.00 feet; thence S 88055'07" E 5.62 to the
southwest comer ofthe said North 20 feet of Lot 2; thence northerly along the west line of said
plat of First Addition to Charleston to the True Point of Beginning.
Richard Chrisinger
That portion of the southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M., Kitsap County,
Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Lots 3 through 7, inclusive and the South 10 feet of Lot 2, Block 1 of the plat of First Addition to
Charleston, as recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kit sap County,
Washington;
Together with a portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 15
described as follows:
Beginning at northwest comer of said South 10 feet of Lot 2 and the True Point of Beginning;
thence N 88055'07" W 5.62 feet; thence S 1022'14" W 64.42 feet; thence on a curve to the
right, the center of which bears N 88037'46" W 182.50 feet, an arc distance of 40.64 feet; thence
S 14007'42" W 56.77 feet; thence S 88055'07" E 22.92 feet to the southwest comer of said Lot
7, also being the west line ofthe said plat of First Addition to Charleston; thence northerly along
said west line to the True Point of Beginning.
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 9 of 10
Tammy Crawley
That portion of the southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M., Kitsap County,
Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Lot 8 and the North 10 feet of Lot 9, Block 1 of the plat of First Addition to Charleston, as
recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kit sap County, Washington;
Together with a portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 15
described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest comer of said Lot 8 and the True Point of Beginning; thence N
88055'07" W 22.92 feet; thence S 14007'42" W 41.06 feet; thence S 88055'07" E 32.05 feet to
the southwest comer of the said North 10 feet of Lot 9, also being the west line of the said plat of
First Addition to Charleston; thence northerly along said west line to the True Point of
Beginning
Duane and Margaret Baker
That portion of the southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M., Kitsap County,
Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Lot 10 and the South 20 feet of Lot 9, Block 1 ofthe plat of First Addition to Charleston, as
recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kit sap County, Washington;
Together with a portion ofthe southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of said Section 15
described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest comer of said South 20 feet of Lot 9 and the True Point of Beginning;
thence N 88055'07" W 32.05 feet; thence S 14007'42" W 15.18 feet; thence on a curve to the
right, the center of which bears N 75052'19" W 45.00 feet, an arc distance of28.39 feet; thence
S 76006'10" E 51.01 feet to the southwest comer of said Lot 10, also being the west line of the
said plat of First Addition to Charleston; thence northerly along said west line to the True Point
of Beginning.
City of Bremerton Boundary Line Adjustment
Page 10 of 10
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Bremerton City Clerk
345 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington 98337
Grantor:
City of Bremerton
Grantee:
Tammy L. Crawley
Abbreviated Legal Description: Portion of the SW ~ of the SE 1/4 of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1
E., W.M., Kitsap County, Washington
Assessor's Tax Parcel ID No. 152401-4-022-2006 and 152401-4-021-2007
QUIT CLAIM DEED
(Individual)
The City ofBremerton ("Grantor"), a Washington municipal corporation, for and in consideration of
$5,093.00 (Five Thousand and Ninety Three dollars), receipt which is hereby acknowledged conveys and quit
claims to Tammy L. Crawley her successors and assigns, the following described real estate, situated in Kitsap
County, Washington State.
A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M.,
Kitsap County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest comer of Lot 8, Block 1, of the plat of First Addition to Charleston, as
recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kit sap County, Washington and
the True Point of Beginning; thence N 88'55'07" W 22.92 feet; thence S 14'07'42" W 41.06
feet; thence S 88'55'07" E 32.05 feet to the southwest comer of the North 10 feet of Lot 9, Block
1, of said plat of First Addition to Charleston, also being the west line of the plat; thence northerly
along said west line to the True Point of Beginning
Consisting of 1,099 square feet.
City of Bremerton Quit Claim Deed
Page 1 of2
Cary Bozeman, Mayor of Bremerton
DATE:
STATE OF WASHINGTON
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF KITSAP
On this day of , 200_, before me a Notary Public in and
for the State of Washington, personally appeared , to me known to be
the individual that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the free and voluntary act, for the
uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that they are authorized to execute said
instrument.
-Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day
and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
APP~~OVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH
City Attorney
City of Bremerton Quit Claim Deed
Page 2 of2
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Bremerton City Clerk
345 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington 98337
Grantor:
City of Bremerton
Grantee:
Thomas Cameron and Kent Mercer
Abbreviated Legal Description: Portion of the SW ~ ofthe SE 1/4 of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1
E., W.M., Kitsap County, Washington
Assessor's Tax Piu:celID No. 152401-4-021-2007 and 152401-4-022-2006
QUIT CLAIM DEED
(Individual)
The City ofBremerton ("Grantor"), a Washington municipal corporation, for and in consideration of
$1,079.00 (One Thousand and Seventy Nine Dollars), receipt which is hereby acknowledged conveys and quit
claims to Thomas Cameron and Kent Mercer their successors and assigns, the following described real estate,
situated in Kitsap County, Washington State.
A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M.,
Kitsap County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest comer of Lot 1, Block 1 of the plat of First Addition to Charleston, as
recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kitsap County, Washington and
the True Point of Beginning; thence N 88"51'09" W 5.54 feet; thence S 1 "22'14" W 50.00 feet;
thence S 88"55'07" E 5.62 to the southwest comer of the North 20 feet of Lot 2, Block 1, of said
plat of First Addition to Charleston; thence northerly along the west line of said plat of First
Addition to Charleston to the True Point of Beginning.
Consisting of 279 square feet.
City of Bremerton Quit Claim Deed
Page 1 of2
Cary Bozeman, Mayor of Bremerton
DATE:
STATE OF WASHINGTON
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF KITSAP
On this day of , 200_, before me a Notary Public in and
for the State of Washington, personally appeared , to me known to be
the individual that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the free and voluntary act, for the
uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that they are authorized to execute said
instrument.
-Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day
and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH
City Attorney
City of Bremerton Quit Claim Deed
Page 2 of2
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Bremerton City Clerk
345 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington 98337
Grantor:
City of Bremerton
Grantee:
Richard B. Chrisinger
Abbreviated Legal Description: Portion of the SW Y4 ofthe SE 1/4 of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1
E., W.M., Kitsap County, Washington
Assessor's Tax Parcel ID No. 152401-4-022-2006 and 152401-4-021-2007
QUIT CLAIM DEED
(Individual)
The City of Bremerton ("Grantor"), a Washington municipal corporation, for and in consideration of
$2,826.00 (Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty Six Dollars), receipt which is hereby acknowledged
conveys and quit claims to Richard B. Chrisinger his successors and assigns, the following described real
estate, situated in Kitsap County, Washington State.
A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M.,
Kitsap County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest comer ofthe South 10 feet of Lot 2, Block 1 ofthe plat of First
Addition to Charleston, as recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kit sap
County, Washington and the True Point of Beginning; thence N 88055'07" W 5.62 feet; thence S
1022' 14" W 64.42 feet; thence on a curve to the right, the center of which bears N 88037'46" W
182.50 feet, an arc distance of 40.64 feet; thence S 14007'42" W 56.77 feet; thence S 88055'07"
E 22.92 feet to the southwest comer of Lot 7, Block 1, of said plat of First Addition to Charleston,
also being the said west line of the plat; thence northerly along said west line to the True Point of
Beginning.
City of Bremerton Quit Claim Deed
Page 1 of2
Consisting of 1,606 square feet.
Cary Bozeman, Mayor ofBremerton
DATE:
STATE OF W ASHlNGTON
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF KITSAP
On this day of , 200_, before me a Notary Public in and
for the State of Washington, personally appeared , to me known to be
the individual that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the free and voluntary act, for the
uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that they are authorized to execute said
instrument.
-Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day
and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
APP_tOVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH
City Attorney
City of Bremertan Quit Claim Deed
Page 2 af2
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
Bremerton City Clerk
345 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, Washington 98337
Grantor:
City of Bremerton
Grantee:
Duane and Margaret Baker
Abbreviated Legal Description: Portion ofthe SW lf4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1
E., W.M., Kitsap County, Washington
Assessor's Tax Parcel ID No. 152401-4-022-2006 and 152401-4-021-2007
QUIT CLAIM DEED
(Individual)
The City ofBremerton ("Grantor"), a Washington municipal corporation, for and in consideration of
$6,869.29 (Six Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Nine Dollars and Twenty Nine Cents), receipt which is hereby
aclrnowledged conveys and quit claims to Duane and Margaret Baker their successors and assigns, the
following described real estate, situated in Kitsap County, Washington State.
A portion of the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 15, T. 24 N., R. 1 E., W.M.,
Kitsap County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the northwest comer of South 20 feet of Lot 9, Block 1, of the plat of First Addition
to Charleston as recorded in Volume 4 in the book of plats, Page 057, records of Kitsap County,
Washington, and the True Point of Beginning; thence N 88055'07" W 32.05 feet; thence S
14007'42" W 15.18 feet; thence on a curve to the right, the center of which bears N 75"52'19" W
45.00 feet, an arc distance of28.39 feet; thence S 76006'10" E 51.01 feet to the southwest comer
of Lot 10, Block 1, of said plat of First Addition to Charleston, also being the west line of said
plat; thence northerly along said west line to the True Point of Beginning.
City of Bremerton Quit Claim Deed
Page I of2
Consisting of 1,757 square feet.
Cary Bozeman, Mayor of Bremerton
DATE:
STATE OF WASHINGTON
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF KITSAP
On this day of ,200_, before me a Notary Public in and
for the State of Washington, personally appeared , to me known to be
the individual that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the free and voluntary act, for the
uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that they are authorized to execute said
instrument.
-Notary Seal Must Appear Within This Box-
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day
and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC, in and for the State
of Washington, residing at
My appointment expires
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH
City Attorney
City of Bremerton Quit Claim Deed
Page 2 of2
lIllIE
1. Tbls ourvey meeto the mlDlmum required eure'I)'iDg etaDcIarde per WAC
332-130-090.
2. This survey accomplished by field traverse procedures uslDg B. two
second total station. .
~
1. U_ "_ . _ ~.d ouney by Word U:uller deted Januery 26. 1984 (Project
'3880).
2. Parcel map of FIre Station fits In HE corner of lIountaiD Ridge Perl<
by Bremerton Ho....1ng Authority dated October 21, 1541 by Bony
EngIneeriDg Co.
S. Boundary LiDe Adjuetment Recorded under J(Itoap County Auditor
File No.
...tmEHIL
. SET 3/4" IRON PIPE AND YElLOW PLASTIC CAP (12)
+ PLAT U:ONllKEllT NOT RECu......... - ASSUlIED u..,..,.,......
PR..........:Ju".." LINE ~...A-I,a!o...a:a.J AT THIS TIME
PLAT/LOT IJNE
C'~~~...i UNE NOT S1.r.........:...... AT THIS TDIE
-0- POLE
o 30 ~ ~
I I
5URY.6.t",,,,,'S ....iIlOAlLU..""ATE:
THIS 1IAP C...A&W:O.......y Al:J.~.....~...:l. .A.
SURVEY WIDE BY lIE OR UNDER >>Y
DlRIlCTlON IN c.... ..-.wICE 1I1TH
THE ~~u~ OF THE o:....,a.-u...
RECORDING ACT. AT TIlE """~u..,r OF
TIlE CITY OF BREloIERTON
IN .JVNE 2005.
I By
Surveyed I
Drawn I S.J.
Checked I G.F.
I FB
\
I Dote lScale 1 "=JO' 1
I I Dote 06/06/05
I 05/05 Draw;ng Nome
105/05 1152401e\survey
11199~ I
I I Sheet3.....of~
DETAIL
N.T.S.
CITY OF BREMERTON
PUBLIC WORKS & UTILlTlI:s
ENGINEERING DIVISION
3027 OL YMPUS DRIVE
BREMERTON, WA. 98310
NWS4'1l''''
St,
I
~w-
E>
i=
· i-
..
<:i /"
s... QJ
0>
l.L..<t
6th
~\
124.22'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'!t-GARAGE- - - - ;f - -LDT 4 I
~ . " oJ:
RESIDENCE > I
- -~ -~ -;-LDT 5 <[ I
'C\lRlSltlGE' I I
r ;- 18't IS' I
~ -(t - ,! ~ -UK' OJ i
"., '- h _~ _ _ +> ~~ I
'DI--_~__.? - LOT 7 +> l<~
iVJr I e:~~1
'''' I Cl.J N""~I
....... "!....'"
,.-, ~~~I
d ~~181
<..,.- g~EI
d -:""',
~:::
---1 '" I
-,~ S8S'55'OrE "I' I
'" ' -3l!.oS' I
~ ~757 s".f~. - - -.1- - LOTlO I
P, If"'3 I
~'1'--- I L[ ~~~rENCE '1l~V.'i.~ I
..... I I
~I LOll!' I
-51.01' ~:. S5~ I 1
a; "~tl I I
- ~ l!i~~ J 11
~ Z W<:I: _ _ _ _ _ _ I
...;. ~t:;~-- I
~ ~-:= I
~ I
a Burwell St. I
- I
~ LUT [
'C~""'-\>.~'
279 sq.f~. " l\E.I'-C
- -~~~~ENCE- -;t- -LDT 2,
~
~~ ..~ .
c, I ~ i
~
n
.
:- l ~ ~~~I
~l :.
C) o:-t
. MN ~~-
~ 11~
::> '-
_0
..
J NSS'37'46''''' J
J
- ~S~~7:=' _ -j'_ -LDT :3
01'6 .
S,.Ji
~<><v ~e'l'
<f-'\. :\<:>~
^~<vS~~~'f- ~~<v~
~v "'9v~
~
'\.,-1..
&
LUT
SURVEY OF PORTION OF SEl /4
DEPUTY COUNTY AUDITOR'
I
I VOL.
AUDITOR
_ OF SURVEY PG.
SEC.15, T.24N..R.l E"W.M.
KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON
:z
~
1:0
:z
i~
/
;:.