Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
5299
ORDINANCE NO. 5299 AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, adopting the City of Bremerton 2016 Comprehensive Plan, amending affiliated subarea plans and repealing ordinances relating to the 2004 Comprehensive Plan and the Manette Subarea Plan. WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton adopted a revised Comprehensive Plan in 2004; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA), and the schedule provided in RCW 36.70A.130, requires an update of the Comprehensive Plan no later than June 30, 2016; and WHEREAS, the GMA establishes statewide goals, guidelines, and procedural requirements to guide the development, coordination, implementation and financing of long- range comprehensive plans; and WHEREAS, pursuant to GMA, the City is required to plan for 20 -years of population and employment growth and the City's updated plan establishes the growth strategy for June 2016 to June 2036; and WHEREAS, in 2014 the City initiated a public process to update the 2004 Comprehensive Plan, and continue to pursue the growth strategy as set forth initially in 2004; and WHEREAS, the updated plan process was based on a land use inventory, a build- out analysis, and the City's capacity to deliver urban services to support desired growth; and WHEREAS, the updated plan process was guided by the GMA, the Puget Sound Regional Council Vision 2040 and Transportation 2040, and the updated Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies; and WHEREAS, during 2014, staff and Councilmembers walked through each Council district identifying nonconforming uses, mapping errors, and input from the Councilmembers' and their constituents of potential updates to the Comprehensive Plan which created the individual District Profiles, that were released for public comment and input prior to establishing a work program for the Comprehensive Plan update; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public workshop and public hearing on September 15 and October 21, 2014 regarding the District Profiles, Comprehensive Plan update work program and publication participation Plan; and 2016 Comprehensive Plan WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan update process was guided by the work program and the public participation plan that was adopted by Resolution No. 3237 on November 19, 2014 by the City Council; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 43.21C RCW and WAC 197-11, a Determination of Significance (DS) with adoption of existing environmental documents with an addendum was filed on November 3, with a voluntary comment period which expired on November 17, 2015 and an appeal period which expired on November 30, 2015 and no appeals were filed; and WHEREAS, the East Park Subarea Plan and the Gorst Subarea Plan are proposed for re -adoption without modification; and WHEREAS, the Downtown Subarea Plan, the Bay Vista Subarea Plan, and the South Kitsap Industrial Area Plan, now known as the Puget Sound Industrial Center -Bremerton, are each proposed for re -adoption with minor amendments; and WHEREAS, the Manette Subarea Plan has been consolidated into the proposed 2016 Comprehensive Plan and therefore is proposed to be repealed; and WHEREAS, the following functional plans adopted prior to the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update will remain effect: Water Systems Plan (Ordinance No. 5220 in 2013), Wastewater Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance No. 5268 in 2014), Stormwater Management Plan (Ordinance No. 5094 in 2009), Nonmotorized Transportation Plan (Ordinance No. 5037 in 2007), and Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (Ordinance No. 5242 in 2014); and WHEREAS, copies of the Draft Comprehensive Plan, affiliated subarea plans, and the environmental determination were made available to citizens and organizations and were distributed to local jurisdictions, libraries, and state agencies for the mandatory sixty (60) day review period pursuant to state law; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton Planning Commission held numerous public workshops and a public hearing on the proposed 2016 Comprehensive Plan which concluded on November 17, 2015 and a public hearing on affiliated subarea plans was concluded on April 19, 2016, at which time, after consideration of public input and the presentations by staff, the Commission recommended the proposed 2016 Comprehensive Plan affiliated subarea plans to the City Council; and WHEREAS, to further public outreach, the Bremerton City Council considered seven televised public presentations during meetings between February 3, 2016 and May 4, 2016 regarding the separate Comprehensive Plan elements; and WHEREAS, on May 7, 2016 the public was notified by legal advertisement in the Kitsap Sun of the opportunity to make comment and participate in the public hearing by the City Council; and 2 2016 Comprehensive Plan WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council held study sessions and a public hearing that concluded on May 18, 2016, considered the public input, the Planning Commission recommendation on the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and the affiliated subarea plan amendments; and WHEREAS, the Bremerton City Council finds that the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and affiliated subarea plans as recommended by the Planning Commission meets the goals and intent of the Growth Management Act; are consistent with the Puget Sound Regional Council's regional growth strategy based on Centers; are fully consistent with Kitsap County Countywide Planning Policies; reflects the early, open and continuous input of Bremerton citizens through the Council -approved Public Participation Program; are supported by environmental analyses; furthers the City's interests in efficient delivery of urban governmental services; and offers expanded choices for housing, transportation, and economic growth, consistent with the quality of life values of the community; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findines and Recitals Incorporated. The findings and recitals set forth above are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. Planning Commission Findings. The findings and conclusions of the Bremerton Planning Commission as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, are hereby adopted. SECTION 3. 2004 Comprehensive Plan Repealed. The 2004 Comprehensive Plan and Ordinance Nos. 4917, 4954, 4985, 5037, 5062, 5094, 5104, 5202, and 5233 adopting and amending the 2004 Comprehensive Plan are hereby repealed and replaced in their entirety by the adoption of this ordinance. The repealing of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan and the ordinances adopting and amending the plan herein does not repeal or affect any vested rights established by said plan and ordinances. SECTION 4. 2016 Comprehensive Plan Adopted. The 2016 Comprehensive Plan, as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby adopted as the new Bremerton Comprehensive Plan. SECTION S. East Park Subarea Plan. The East Park Subarea Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 4962 is hereby re -adopted as currently established. SECTION 6. Gorst Subarea Plan. The Gorst Subarea Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 5237 is hereby re -adopted as currently established. SECTION 7. Manette Subarea Plan. Ordinance No. 5082 establishing the Manette Subarea Plan is hereby repealed in its entirety. 3 2016 Comprehensive Plan SECTION 8. Bay Vista Subarea Plan. The Bay Vista Subarea Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 5077 and amended by Ordinance No. 5202 is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 9. Downtown Subarea Plan. The Downtown Subarea Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 5034 and amended by Ordinance No. 5202 is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 10. PSIC-Bremerton Subarea Plan. The Puget Sound Industrial Center -Bremerton (PSIC-Bremerton), formerly known as South Kitsap Industrial Area (SKIA), Subarea Plan as adopted by Ordinance No. 5188 is hereby amended as set forth in Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 11. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 12. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council the 4,4\ " day of 12016 ERIC YO GER, C ncil President Approved this Igr*— day of a4v 2016 oe k744� / PATTY L ,Mayor ATTEST: 3VA��� * SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: R'+R A. LUBOVICH, City Attorne PUBLISHED the � day of V1 , 2016 EFFECTIVE the '" da of UUMb '2016 ORDINANCE NO. 0�9 R:\Legal\Legal\Ordinances\Community Development\2016 Comprehensive Plan - Final.doc 4 2016 Comprehensive Plan Exhibit A 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update Ordinance DRAFT FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION Summary — The Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed Comprehensive Plan Update. The Comprehensive Plan is the blueprint document on how the City should develop to accommodate the future growth within the next twenty years (to 2036). The Comprehensive Plan is a City document, however is must be certified by Washington State's Department of Commerce and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). The City of Bremerton adopted it's the last Comprehensive Plan in December 2004. I. FINDINGS OF FACT - GENERAL 1. Project Description The primary impetus for the update of the Comprehensive Plan is to ensure consistency with the Growth Management Act (regulated by Department of Commerce), PSRC's Vision 2040 and Transportation 2040 and the Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies. Substantive amendments proposed per this Update can be summarized in the following • Simplify and streamline the current Comprehensive Plan to create a more user friendly document. • Each plan element's goals, and policies and strategies are being reviewed and amended to address recent trends, consistency with state and regional goals, including: Introduction, Land Use, Housing, Transportation, Environment, Economic Development, and City Services. • The City's current land use plan would be amended in a targeted manner to bring land capacity into alignment with growth targets, and to reduce nonconformities between planned and existing land uses where future land use designations are considered inappropriate. • The Neighborhood Centers in Haddon, Oyster Bay, Kitsap Lake, and Sylvan/Pine would be removed and replaced with Low Density Residential designations, and, in some cases, commercial designations. • Mineral lands overlays would be applied to large tracts of Low Density Residential areas west and south of Kitsap Lake. • Policies to address National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit requirements to evaluate codes to provide for low impact development standards. Exhibit A 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update Ordinance 2. Procedural History The Comprehensive Plan Update was drafted, reviewed and recommended for adoption after a series of workshops and hearings with agencies and members of the public. • 2.1 City Council Walking Tour of Districts — Summer 2014 Staff and most of the City Council Representatives walked each district to identify potential updates to the Comprehensive Plan. • 2.2 Planning Commission Workshop on LCA—July 15, 2015 Discussed with Planning Commission the Land Capacity Analysis complied in the Kitsap County Buildable Lands Review • 2.3 Initial Work Program Released: Planning Commission Workshop — September 15, 2014 Discussed the Comprehensive Plan Update, including the Work Program, Public Participation Process, and overview of the schedule. Encouraging comments from the public regarding the Work Program. This sets the framework for the discussions for the next 2 -years. • 2.4 Work Program received approval from Planning Commission Workshop — October 21, 2014 Planning Commission provided recommendation of the Work Program, Schedule and Public Participation Plan for City Council's approval. City Council will provide decision on November 19, 2014. • 2.5 Planning Commission Workshop Formatting and Streamlining Approach — November 18, 2014 Discussed re -formatting Comprehensive Plan and streamlining the plan, and the goals and policies. • 2.6 Work Program approved by City Council Public Hearing — November 19, 2014 City Council passed Resolution No. 3237 which set the Work Program for the Comprehensive Plan Update and the Public Participation Program. • 2.7 Planning Commission Special Meeting and Open House - January 20, 2015 Held an open house and workshop focused on the Land Use Vision, proposed Land Use Map revisions, and goals and polices for Land Use. Prior to this Open House, a Citywide Mass mailing was sent out to all City property owners (approximately 9,000 notices). Approximately 50 people attended the Open House. • 2.8 Land Use: Planning Commission Public Workshop - February 17, 2015 Discussed the Housing Element vision, objectives and the goals and policies, and minor revisions to Land Use Draft Map. • 2.9 Economic Development Planning Commission Public Workshop - March 17, 2015 Discussed the Economic Development vision, objectives and the goals and policies. • 2.10 Transportation Planning Commission Public Workshop - April 21, 2015 Discussed the Transportation Element's vision, goals and policies. • 2.11 Land Use Planning Commission Public Workshop - June 16, 2015 Revisited the Land Use Chapter and Maps. • 2.12 Environment Planning Commission Public Workshop - July 21, 2015 Discussed the Environmental Chapter, limited revisions with the Shoreline Master Program and Critical Areas Ordinance, and reviewed the adopted Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan. • 2.13 Planning Commission Open House - August 18, 2015 Discussed the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Approximately 30 people attended to discuss the vision for transportation in Bremerton within 20 years, prioritizing of transportation funding, and the various modes of transportation utilized in the City. • 2.14 Planning Commission Public Workshop - September 15, 2015 Discussed the City Service Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Exhibit A 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update Ordinance • 2.15 Video: September 2015 Growing Bremerton Together With Mayor Patty Lent interview Staff to inform the public about this important project. • 2.16 Planning Commission Public Workshop — October 20, 2015 Discussed the City Service Appendix of the Comprehensive Plan Update, http://www.bremertonwa.gov/727/Growing- Bremerton -Together • 2.17 Planning Commission Public Hearing — November 17, 2015 Draft Comprehensive Plan Update was release in advance for November 17 meeting. Planning Commission deliberated and made recommendation to City Council for adoption. A second citywide mailing was performed to inform about the Public Hearing. 9000 postcards were sent to all property owners within City limits. • 2.18 Website: www.Bremerton2035.com was continual updated with comments, draft documents, upcoming meeting notices, etc. 3. Public Comment Public comment was received throughout the duration of the Comprehensive Plan Update. Comments were received in various formats including letters, e-mails, postcard, and public testimony at workshops and hearings. The Planning Commission considered all public comment provided. The Department of Community Development has maintained a written comment matrix with Staff response throughout the project and has maintained an interested parties list that was used for public notification. 4. SEPA Determination As the City is updating the current (2004) Comprehensive Plan, much of the environmental review will continue to be applicable, however additional review needed to be conducted to address the minor changes. The City provided a Determination of Significance with adoption of existing environmental documents with a supportive addendum to address the minor changes on November 3, 2015. The voluntary public comment period on the DS expired on November 17, 2015. The appeal period on the DNS expired on November 30, 2015. S. Consistency 5.1 The proposal meets requirements is consistent with the Washington State Growth Management Act goals and policies as stated by Washington State's Department of Commerce Extended Checklist for planning for population and employment growth for the next 20 years (till 2036). 5.2 The proposal meets the requirements of the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Vision 2040 and Transportation 2040 and complies with PRSC Checklist. 5.3 The proposal is consistent with the Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies and regional efforts. Exhibit A 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update Ordinance 5.4 The recommended Update will result in minor modifications to the development and use potential of certain areas. The revision will generally allow for greater flexibility on the part of owners to utilize their properties. 5.5 The proposed Update included continuous and open public involvement and adequate public notice. The Update underwent public hearings, public workshops, and review at the Planning Commission level. All public hearings at the Planning Commission level, as well as public workshops, were noticed with formal advertisement in the Kitsap Sun, and dates were posted on the City of Bremerton website. Drafts of the recommended Update were continuously posted to the City of Bremerton website (www.Bremerton2035.com), and paper copies were made available for review at the Community Development offices at 345 6th St. III. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission concludes that the proposed 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update is consistent with Department of Commerce, the Growth Management Act, Puget Sound Regional Council, and Kitsap County -Wide Planning Policies. The Commission concludes that the proposed Update is adequate to address the City's management of both population and employment growth over the next 20 year cycle (until 2036). Respectfully submitted by: 4 Approved by: Riclh rd L. Tift, i Planning Commission w f i c) the Cty of Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan. This ive Plan'is the umbrellapolicy document that guides virtually all decisions made by City g"/ ern„anent and, in many cases, by local organizations and individual eitizens. It seeks to assure that each community decision, expenditure, and action is consistent with our shared vision, values, and goals The City adopted its fiat Comprehensive Plan in 1995 in response to the requirements of tie Growth Management Act (GMA) (RCW 36.70A). This update builds.off of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan update,, nd responds to'the GMA requirement for periodic ;;,, review and revisions. The Vision for Bremerton's Future.............................................................................................................1-4 Introduction................................................................................................................................................1-4 Why Have a Comprehensive Plan?.........................................................................................................1-5 What is in Our Comprehensive Plan?.....................................................................................................1-5 Howis the Plan Implemented?..............................................................................................................1-6 Relationship of the Comprehensive Plan to Other Plans.......................................................................1-7 CitizenParticipation...............................................................................................................................1-8 Concurrency and Levels of Service.........................................................................................................1-8 Periodic Review and Update of the Comprehensive Plan......................................................................1-8 Population and Employment Growth.........................................................................................................1-9 The Parameters of Change: Population and Employment Growth Projections.....................................1-9 The Vision for Bremerton's Future The citizens of Bremerton embrace their city, with pride in its assets and accomplishments, and with optimism about the opportunities it affords. Bremerton is a progressive, active city with diversity in its residents, and with its economic, residential and recreational opportunities. Founded and shaped by a maritime legacy and a stunning natural environment, Bremerton's setting is unique and spectacular. Moreover, as the metropolitan center of West Sound, it provides a convenient middle ground between the regional amenities of Seattle and Tacoma and the recreational treasures of the Kitsap and Olympic Peninsulas. Bremerton's location provides both vistas of, and unparalleled access to, the metropolis and the wilderness. While the City's location is ideal, the heart of the community is found in Bremerton neighborhoods and designated Centers. Centers, servicing either a neighborhood, a larger community, or a largely employment -focused setting, provide walking convenience to employment, recreation, amenities, goods, and services. Downtown is at the core of the inter -connected Centers with a vibrant, unique concentration of services, public resources, and attractions. In conjunction with building such mixed use urban settings, the qualities of single family areas and other cohesive and healthy neighborhoods will be preserved and protected. Bremerton promotes and encourages economic development based on solid state-of-the-art infrastructure. Technology and extensive transportation systems connect Bremerton residents and businesses to the world, while flexible codes assist in the development and revitalization of prime real estate for corporate and industrial developments. Healthy growth over the next twenty years will showcase Bremerton's opportunities, while preserving its assets, accomplishments, and friendly, personable atmosphere. Introduction Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan is the city's foundational policy document that guides growth and development for the next twenty years from now until 2036. It seeks to assure that each community decision, expenditure, and actions are consistent with the City's shared vision, values, and goals. Why Have a Comprehensive Plan? A city's comprehensive plan is vital in preparing for future growth and emerging challenges such as traffic congestion, housing needs, and environmental stewardship. People need a safe and secure place to live, an economy that provides jobs, mobility, schools and colleges, and recreational opportunities. It is the city government's responsibility to provide public services and facilities, develop policies, and adopt regulations to guide the growth of a city that meets the needs of its people. The Bremerton Comprehensive Plan captures community goals and establishes specific policies that directly influence how our city will grow and change over time. The Comprehensive Plan is the one place that various city plans and programs come together to work towards a single community vision for the future. As an "umbrella" document, the plan's policies guide other city plans, neighborhood area plans, spending on capital projects, development of regulations, and other programs and services, all of which affect the community in large or small ways. A comprehensive plan is a broad statement of community goals and policies that direct the orderly and coordinated physical development of a city into the future. A comprehensive plan anticipates change and provides specific guidance for future legislative and administrative actions. It reflects the results of citizen involvement, technical analysis, and the judgment of decision makers. The maps, goals, and policies of the plan provide the basis for the adoption of regulations, programs, and services which implement the plan. The plan serves as a guide for zoning, infrastructure development, and developing community services. What is in Our Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan is designed to be a readable, functional document that will guide Bremerton's future development and fulfill the city's regional responsibilities in growth management. This plan is organized in the following manner: • Chapter 1: Introduction • Chapter 2 through 7: Contains the General Element chapters that contain visions, goals and policies for each subject: 2. Land Use 5. Economic Development 3. Housing 6. City Services 4. Transportation 7. Environment • Chapter 8: Contains the appendices for General Element chapters with the supporting technical material including existing conditions, and glossaries of key terms. How is the Plan Implemented? Adopting a plan is the first step toward shaping the city's future. Bremerton's implementation of the Comprehensive Plan is comprised of a combination of short-term and long-term actions. Some of the short-term actions include amendment of regulations such as the Land Use Code and the approval of rezones that match the plan's land use designation. Long-term actions include neighborhood area/subarea planning; monitoring, evaluating, and amending the plan as conditions change; and developing a capital investment program that allocates resources to projects that will spur the city's development in the direction envisioned in the plan. Relationship of the Comprehensive Plan to Other Plans Washington's Growth Management Act The state Growth Management Act (GMA), enacted in 1990, requires that all cities and counties above certain sizes prepare comprehensive plans and update those plans at certain intervals. GMA's goals include reducing sprawl and directing growth to areas that already have urban services. GMA calls on counties to work with cities to establish urban growth boundaries, outside of which urban -style development is prohibited. Comprehensive plans must show that each city has enough land in appropriate zoning categories to absorb the expected level of growth for twenty years into the future, along with the transportation, water, and sewer facilities to serve that growth. GMA also requires that cities' plans must be consistent with other regional plans. In this region, these plans include Vision 2040 and the Kitsap County Countywide Planning Policies. Vision 2040 The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) is the regional growth management and transportation organization covering King, Snohomish, Pierce, and Kitsap Counties. It is governed by elected officials from across the region, and together they have adopted a regional growth strategy called Vision 2040. That strategy establishes a framework that is reflected in this Plan. It calls for concentrating population and job growth in designated centers and for using multimodal transit options to connect these centers. Bremerton's Plan identifies one downtown regional growth center, three district centers, a neighborhood center, an employment center, and manufacturing/ industrial centers that are concentrations of population, employment and services that carry the regional centers concept to a neighborhood scale. Vision 2040 also assumes a distribution of growth across the Puget Sound region, with especially large shares of growth going to the five metropolitan cities of Seattle, Bellevue, Everett, Tacoma, and Bremerton. This Plan reflects Bremerton's commitment to accommodate its share of regional growth. Kitsap County Countywide Planning Policies GMA requires that counties adopt policies that will guide the plans for all the jurisdictions in the county. In Kitsap County, the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council is a body of elected officials who develop the Countywide Planning Policies (CPPB) and make recommendations to the board of County Commissioners for adoption. The CPPB contain the twenty-year housing and job -growth targets for Kitsap jurisdictions. These policies address the need for affordable housing in the county, diversified economy with efficient transportation options, and for growing in ways that will contribute to positive health impacts for residents. Citizen Participation The Act requires "early and continuous" citizen participation throughout the planning process. The first Comprehensive Plan developed in response to the Act in April, 1995, and the Update in 2004 was adopted through intensive citizen committee processes. The preparation of this 2016 Plan Update was again guided by community participation, following a City Council -approved Public Participation Program for the process, found in the Appendix. Numerous public events, including open houses and a design charrette to gather transportation mapping ideas, were held throughout the update process to allow the broader community to comment. Over a dozen public workshops were held by the City of Bremerton Planning Commission before it was adopted by the City Council in their own public hearing process. Concurrency and Levels of Service Plans must be realistic and workable. Providing for new development, the Plan must indicate how the needed public services and utilities will be provided within a reasonable amount of time. If adequate public resources are not identified in the Plan, development cannot be allowed. In order to deal with traffic and congestion which results from new development, transportation planning requirements now include the measuring of Levels of Service (LOS). The Level of Service measurement requires an account of the current, expected, and acceptable levels of congestion and service qualities for the local community. There must be discussion within the community that leads to adoption of future standards, and a plan that assures that, as development occurs, the adopted standard will not be violated. This is called the concurrency requirement. Plans may also require that other urban services, such as police protection, water and sewer service, library services, etc., be maintained at a LOS set by the community, "concurrent" with growth. Periodic Review and Update of the Comprehensive Plan Following adoption of the updated Comprehensive Plan and related development regulations, the City will continually monitor their effectiveness and document needed amendments. A major review of the Plan is set pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130 while amendments to the Plan will only be considered during annual reviews. Emergency amendments to the comprehensive plan may be considered and adopted more than once a year if an emergency exists. An emergency is defined as an issue of community -wide significance that promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare. Population and Employment Growth The following sections discuss the expected population increases that this Plan proposes to accommodate. By state law, the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) is tasked with providing a population allocation for each county in the State. It is left to the County, and the jurisdictions within it, to cooperatively decide where and how the population growth will be accommodated. This leads to questions about the portion of growth to be directed to cities and the capacity of urban services to accept growth. It should be understood from the outset, however, that the OFM allocation — while mandated by State law - is really a broad range of potential growth numbers, allowing for flexibility in establishing local growth projections. Kitsap County and the municipalities within it, collaborate to determine how the OFM allocation for population growth will be distributed throughout the county. During 2015 a process was conducted at the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council (KRCC) to establish population and employment targets in the Countywide Planning Policies (CPP's). These growth targets were set to conform to the Countywide Planning Policy vision to concentrate growth into urban areas as well as to ensure growth occurs in Kitsap jurisdictions that is consistent with Puget Sound Regional Council's (PSRC) Vision 2040 growth plan. The Parameters of Change: Population and Employment Growth Projections In projecting the City of Bremerton's growth, there must be consideration of past trends which show negligible population growth over several decades. However, historical growth patterns are not consistent with local, regional, or State goals that include increasing the proportion of growth in existing urban areas. Under the Growth Management Act, as well as the regional strategy reflected in the CPPS, stagnant population levels within Bremerton will be broken. As shown in Vision 2040, Bremerton is identified as the only metropolitan City in Kitsap County (along with Seattle, Tacoma and Everett) and thus is slated to attract a larger percentage of the projected population growth than in the past. The Plan's key urban design concept is "The Centers Concept", detailed in the Land Use Element. Population growth for the City is largely calculated on the ability of the strategically -placed, mixed-use activity centers to attract new residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Population Projection The 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update is designed to plan for the growth in the City's planning area expected over a 20 -year period — 2016 to 2036. The City's land use plan must accommodate the expected growth consistent with the community's vision. In turn the growth must be supported by the transportation element, parks and recreation element, and capital facilities plan. A base year of 2012 is presented as it is the base year of the Buildable Lands Report (Kitsap County, 2014) which is a monitoring tool for growth. Over the period 2012-2036, the current city limits would grow by about 13,757 persons above the 2012 population of 39,650; the city's future 2036 population is anticipated to be 53,407. The City's associated Urban Growth Areas (UGA's) would grow from 9,123 persons approximately to 13,473 in 2036, a net change of 4,350. Jobs would likewise grow by 18,782, primarily due to the addition of jobs in the Puget Sound Industrial Center — Bremerton (a Manufacturing Industrial Center). The UGA job change would be 1,443 over the 2012-2036 period. See the exhibit below. Bremerton Population, Households, and Jobs 2012-2036 Source: (Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2015); (Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council, 2014) City of Bremerton 2015; BERK Consulting 2015 The growth is visually represented below: Bremerton Planning Area Growth Chart 6(),()00 10,000 INO om 1)renr rl:oIu Bremerton Bret nerua m IlG�A I IGA IIGA Irsl.)s I'nylmi3O oll I1(pu elloids J(;)l:o5 P o rne ia1ioI IInmsello&IS 02012. uiiiii N t Gin:,ruvllu 2012, e15 The City's proposed land use plan would have more than sufficient land use capacity to meet its growth targets adopted in the CPP's. To allow for a conservative analysis and match the remaining growth anticipated in the City's 2004 Comprehensive Plan, City sewer and water functional plans, and Kitsap County's Comprehensive Plan and transportation models as of 2012, the City is planning for growth that is slightly higher than growth targets. See exhibit below. Bremerton Growth Capacity, Growth Targets, and Growth Assumptions 111111111 2,456 1 1,443 II 4,347 UGA 1='olaulation 3,972 IIIA 4,350 20,652 IID 8,276 I::31"C"IT1C�1"tCil'1JC)?5 11 .8,782 13remerton 1='olaulation12,367 IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1I. ,757 0 5,000 3.0,000 3.5,000 20,000 25,000 30,.000 35,000 IIIII Capacity 20.3..5 11111111 i argot 20.3.2-36 111111111 I)Ian Growth 20.3.2-2036 Source: (Washington State Office of Financial Management, 2015); (Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council, 2014) City of Bremerton 2015; BERK Consulting 2015 f/ 0 � j k, I r , , � �, I ,r"„�� � / /Ir�:� VN° II t r�ur V(fj�f �� �, .eaK., i � i rri/�j o�j / / it /i%rr rG// / � ¢r 1„ , , ;a: „ �' / r �(�/%/%11J%�li���ir�i� n�/ ////%/;iii%i /dip //�/��j�//� ��f ��i/ ���dr% ,. �� �o �.. ,,,,,,,,,, § / i;�f' / �r ,, /,%//p//r rror ii%/„riii%//�%/%/%�/ � i�/��/%� f��/ ��r. ,� .,��- �; r it ��1VY�!/I/ rmwii/i/irl/, /rr �, /�/�/ i � �� c��� � � s� u' v � WNttrD/i�,a ' /i” � / I� r Y�` i�� °” r" r ��, y�" LandUse Introduction..............................................................................................................................LU-4 Concerns of a Wider Public: State and Regional Issues.......................................................................LU-4 Responding to the Technical Challenges.............................................................................................LU-4 Discussion: User Guide.........................................................................................................................LU-5 Vision........................................................................................................................................................ LU -6 Goals& Policies........................................................................................................................................LU-6 LandUse Goals: ........................................................................................................................................ LU -6 CitywidePolicies..................................................................................................................................LU-7 LandUse Map........................................................................................................................................LU-10 Centers General Description..................................................................................................................LU-15 CentersPolicies..................................................................................................................................LU-15 Designations.............................................................................................. LU -Error! Bookmark not defined. DRC (Downtown Regional Center).....................................................................................................LU-17 DC(District Center)............................................................................................................................LU-19 EC (Eastside Employment Center).....................................................................................................LU-22 NeighborhoodCenter........................................................................................................................LU-23 NB (Neighborhood Business).............................................................................................................LU-25 GC(General Commercial)..................................................................................................................LU-26 FC(Freeway Corridor)........................................................................................................................LU-27 HE(Higher Education)........................................................................................................................LU-28 PSIC — Bremerton (Puget Sound Industrial Center — Bremerton)......................................................LU-29 I(Industrial)........................................................................................................................................LU-30 LDR (Low Density Residential)...........................................................................................................LU-31 MDR (Medium Density Residential)...................................................................................................LU-33 MR (Multifamily Residential).............................................................................................................LU-34 BV(Bay Vista).....................................................................................................................................LU-35 EP(East Park).....................................................................................................................................LU-36 CUL (City Utility Lands).......................................................................................................................LU-37 WS(Watershed Lands).......................................................................................................................LU-38 SpecificArea Plans.................................................................................................................................LU-39 UrbanGrowth Areas..............................................................................................................................LU-40 UrbanGrowth Area Map.......................................................................................................................LU-41 EventualGrowth Intent.........................................................................................................................LU-42 EquivalenceTable..............................................................................................................................LU-44 OpenSpace............................................................................................................................................LU-46 OpenSpace Map....................................................................................................................................LU-47 Land Use Introduction Over the past century, Bremerton firmly established itself as the primary city within the larger West Sound community. Centrally located and well connected to the region, Bremerton has well established urban character and distinctive neighborhoods. Bremerton remains the hub of the County despite growth patterns in suburban development occurring in formerly rural places like Silverdale. Looking to the next century, Bremerton must attract new quality development with clear opportunities that take advantage of the city's superior setting. The Plan's land use strategy seeks to return Bremerton's vitality, economic strength, and desirability as a place to live and work. Called the Centers Concept, this strategy also capitalizes on new demographic trends and new opportunities. This Comprehensive Plan strives for Bremerton's communities and established neighborhoods to each have a distinctive focus, yet all are walkable and well connected to each other, including a vibrant downtown with a mixture of activities. Concerns of a Wider Public: State and Regional Issues A comprehensive plan ensures that the wider public interest frames the planning process. First, a plan must reflect the general goals of the State's Growth Management. Second, a plan must be consistent with a regional planning approach. In Kitsap County, the Countywide Planning Policies (CPP's) and the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Multi -County Planning Policies in Vision 2040 must be met. This ensures general consistency between comprehensive plans as well as regional concerns. As identified by PSRC, the Regional Growth Strategy in Vision2040 has identified Bremerton as a metropolitan city for Kitsap County. The metropolitan cities are intended to serves as a civic, cultural, and economic hub. Metropolitan cities are also intended to accommodate a significant share of future population and employment growth. Responding to the Technical Challenges This Land Use Element — like other sections of this Comprehensive Plan — responds to the type and scale of change expected over the next twenty years. In the simplest terms, the Land Use Element must accommodate the projected population and employment growth with sufficient areas for housing, businesses, and industry. The Land Use Appendix provides a detailed discussion of population projections, resultant land needs, and other calculations and discussions that support this Element. Discussion: User Guide The following section of the Land Use Element includes the Goals, Policies and specific land use designations. The reader should review the Citywide Land Use goals and Citywide Policies. Next, identify the designations on the Land Use Map. If your property is located within a Center, please review the overall policies that are for all Centers. The remaining land use information will follow within the Land Use Designations, which includes specific policies for the designation. Vision Bremerton i,s a metropolitancity that provides for economic vitality and diverse lifestyles through a broad variety of job�, housing, andstrategically located commercial and recreational opportunities. Goals & Policies The following goals and policies form the foundation of Bremerton's land use strategy for the future. These goals and policies are to support the overall land use vision stated above. Land Use Goals: (.13. Protect Bim in ror)"s rwf rl rnal-Ornn r f Citywide Policies The four land use goals (described on previous page) were developed to support the Land Use Vision. Associated policies have been created to support and implement the Land Use goals and vision. The following are policies that should be considered citywide: oMl LUL VIIain four Bireiirneirtoin's ll olll Wlatiioin aind eiirnplloyiirneint guro th . Implementing Policies for Goal LU1: LU1(A): Designate neighborhoods, communities, and centers throughout the City and encourage the implementation of design guidelines for new development and redevelopment that complement the designated purpose and scale. LU1(B): Coordinate Bremerton's growth consistent with the Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies and the Puget Sound Regional Council's Vision 2040, and state requirements. LU1(C): Coordinate with Naval Base Kitsap to minimize conflicts between development and naval operations, and consider the Kitsap County Joint Land Use Study, 2015. LU1(D): On an annual basis review and provide amendments, if necessary, to the goals and policies and the Land Use Map to address changing circumstances and/or emergencies. LU1(E): Preserve regional historic, visual and cultural resources including public views, landmarks, archaeological sites, historic and cultural landscapes, and areas of special character within Bremerton. Coordinate with proper agencies and tribal governments to ensure preservation. oMl LU2. Encourage coinourn is v lllollpurnein't withiin'the City. Implementing Policies for Goal LU2: LU2(A): In order to combat chronic vacancy experienced in select areas, the City should consider zoning regulations that promote occupancy for buildings that are experiencing prolong vacancy. LU2(B): Support flexible development regulations to allow transitions of uses over time. LU2(C): Support adaptive reuse of existing buildings with uses that are compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. LU2(D):Provide development incentives and flexibility within regulations to encourage desirable design elements. LU2(E): Promote exposure of City businesses and community events by signage that is proportion to the intensity of the Land Use designation, while recognizing the existing character of the neighborhood. Discourage off -premise signage throughout the City (including billboards), with exceptions for special events to be considered. LU2(E): Coordinate and work cooperatively with the State of Washington, Kitsap County, and appropriate agencies for the siting of essential public facilities that develops criteria in such a way as to minimize negative impacts to neighborhoods and other areas of Bremerton, while recognizing the needs of the people of the State and region for these facilities. • Public facilities should showcase community design interests, guidelines, or standards, especially in their design and building processes. • Encourage flexibility of use and maximum efficiency so that facilities and services will be harmonious with neighborhood needs, adjacent uses, and the environment. • Develop citing criteria and processes to assure timely and consistent locating of essential public facilities. MILU3v Pr tectur urneir oin" urmatuur� 1� inviur� iniirneint. Implementing Policies for Goal LU3: LU3(A): Review and update as necessary Bremerton's regulations that protect critical areas, including anadromous fisheries, using the best available science as defined by and required in the Growth Management Act (per RCW 36.70A.172 (1)). LU3(B): Utilize existing public land for better access to shoreline and recreation areas such as street ends, parks, and open space. LU3(C): Promote land use patterns and development phasing to minimize impacts on natural systems, maximize returns on infrastructure investment, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. LU3(D): Adopt site and building standards that contribute to reduced greenhouse gas emissions and result in more sustainable development. LU3(E): Assure that future land uses and land use patterns conserve and protect groundwater resources including well -head protection and protecting the aquifer recharge areas. LU3(F): Protect Natural Resource Lands as defined and required under the Growth Management Act by discouraging incompatible uses in or near Natural Resource Lands and develop criteria for designation of Natural Resource Lands consistent with RCW 36.70A.050 and 365-190 WAC. LU3(G): Adopt and implement appropriate standards and regulations for stormwater management, including Low Impact Development technologies and encouraging watershed planning efforts. The City of Bremerton should adopt and implement regional plans, strategies, and standards as appropriate. LU3(H): Encourage preservation of existing healthy and safe trees on private, commercial and public property. LU3(1): Promote infill and concurrent infrastructure improvements in areas that are already developed in order to preserve rural areas, open spaces, and ecological functioning lands within the City. LU3(K): Establish and encourage standards for implementing Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs) where appropriate. MLU4. Piiroiirnote coiirniirnuinity lh e lhth by 41d ming l poiir"tuiirii,ties,foiir, lheMthy l ffest choices. Implementing Policies for Goal LU4: LU4(A): Preserve regional historic, visual and cultural resources including public views, landmarks, archaeological sites, historic and cultural landscapes, and areas of special character within Bremerton. Coordinate with proper agencies and tribal governments to ensure preservation. LU4(B): Provide multimodal options and standards that have connectivity throughout the City, especially linking centers and neighborhoods for all modes of transportation. LU4(C): Provide land use regulations that give opportunities for the community to have fair access to livelihood, education, and resources. LU4(D): As there are no lands appropriate for designation as agricultural lands within the City or its Urban Growth Area, the City does encourage the local food movement and small urban gardens for the benefit of the neighborhoods; with prioritizing low-income neighborhoods. LU4(E): Promote healthy communities design that make it easier for people to live healthy lives through coordination with community groups, agencies, and businesses. VIEW. LAND USE MAP #3 wW WEDGEWO D =p G LES G UB Y HI� 3F .� qeP O � O U 2 fy�1 A W L MA 2 .w S¢ W JAVI ¢tl ,�. m Land Use Designations u Bay Vista (BV) City Utility Lands (CUL) IN Freeway Corridor (FC) n General Commercial (GC) IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Industrial (1) Low Density Residential (LDR) Multifamily Residential (MR) Neighborhood Business (NB) Co Subarea Plan EMMineral Resource Overlay Kitsap County >„ BR ° MAI 4'p o _ K o�� m �O z z T m ° CHREV .. mMYERRS _ Q 7 J 29TH DOWEL �,� ,�,�. IS" (I_ I 0 KENNEDY W > 0 a Y K 1EATHE K '9TH ....... 18TH _ K K �f oIIM1P[ m H I i i TI I i' v LOXIE EA AN$ PO'1 wm IH PREBLwgj �x LAND USE MAP #4 _..._..._... ...... found I r w ✓, X77 ." mlrM�m+ U I— syn �, ww" a"ttyN"mmuu. O _.._ _.. o CLAIR I.AS o r w � W tiUNK � 04 A� w <1 _ w Opp 20 10= J Y tt S� Land Use Designations Bay Vista Subarea Plan (BVSAP) C, ,.. , City Utility Lands (CUL) Freeway Corridor (FC) NGeneral Commercial (GC) Industrial (1) LOW Density Residential (LDR) Puget Sound Industrial Center Bremerton (PSIC-B) Watershed (WS) ,www Subarea Plan OCenter O� Mineral Resource Overlay i 0 .,..,,,�..", .,:.«m LPKE„F..LOR�P,.„rr�°^""• I �� = Kitsap County •� // ( j f` 1 1 1 1 � /� l� i 1 � � �' � i,,, � 1 l� I , I , � � I ,,,,,; � �� f l i,,, l � � �, � � � �, I � � �, � �� 1 � � i,,, l I/ /r ,�, ,w w ,,,, �„w Centers General Description In general, a Center is a mixed-use area. It places residences, basic services for residents, employment opportunities, and amenities such as public spaces and parks, in a well-designed area. Centers will have the "look and feel" of a small downtown, with moderate to high density uses at their core, transitioning out to surrounding single family areas. This Plan employs five types of Centers: • Downtown Regional Center • District Centers o Charleston o Wheaton/Riddell o Wheaton/Sheridan • Employment Centers o Eastside • Neighborhood Centers o Manette • Manufacturing and Industrial Center o Puget Sound Industrial Center -Bremerton While the Centers' types are based on sound planning principles that assess proper mixes of uses, critical quantities of residential and commercial uses, and proven design principles, there is a range of mixes and design approaches that can be successful. Specific policies for specific centers are discussed in the following pages. The following are Centers' Policies are applicable to all centers mentioned above. Centers Policies Ml ILUI. PG Iaiirm four Bireirneirtoin's pop lath in aind eiirnyiirneint girowth. LU1-Cen(A): Development regulations should encourage pedestrian oriented mixed-use design in Centers and address such issues as: (1) Locating buildings or features in the core of the Center at sidewalk edge, (2) Providing windows and other architectural features that foster pedestrian interest along street fronts, (3) Adopting sign standards that reflect pedestrian scale, (4) Encouraging and/or requiring architectural features that are of a scale and type appropriate for viewing by pedestrians at the building front and immediately nearby, and (5) Development projects should be encouraged to provide amenities such as street furniture, street trees, small public spaces and plazas, etc. LU1-Cen(B): Provide for advanced utility planning to offer upgraded, ready -to -serve services for development designed to achieve maximum density. LU1-Cen(C): Building facades shall utilize architectural features that provide for horizontal and vertical modulation. LU1-Cen(D): Alternative circulation for automobiles should be provided as much as possible with consideration for freight circulation for local businesses. The goals of alternative circulation designs should include: (1) reducing traffic in pedestrian oriented core of the Center, and (2) placing parking away from the street. LU1-Cen(E): Consider the existing built environment when creating development regulations. µm �m ✓�u XT, m r� ✓���m�,✓✓�r"'r°s✓✓%e�✓��r"a�°��,✓✓� '�/✓✓ �� r �� d +s pdd�,�d ,r, /1,f✓, ,/r`,�, �,�',a� ��+`"�r'`d"�a Figure LU -2 Parking Ratios LU1-Cen(F): 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. MLU2. Encourage ecoin urn is vl l urnein't ithuiin 'thCity. LU2-Cen(A): Pre -qualify key areas and sites for environmental permitting through such tools as subarea plans and related programmatic Environmental Impact Statement's. Work toward enabling development in Centers to proceed as a Planned Action under the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) including coordination with the local tribal government for protection of treaty cultural and natural resources. LU2-Cen(B): Coordinate with Kitsap Transit to provide transit access to centers. LU2-Cen(C): Provide incentives and flexibility that encourage and enable development in Centers, including alternative parking options like payment in lieu of parking spaces. MILU3v Protect Bir urneir oin" urmatuur� 1� inviur urmurnein'tv LU3-Cen(A): Provide recreation opportunities within centers including access to the shoreline. MLU4. Pirairnote cornirnuinity lhMhth by Mdowiing l poiir"tuiirii,ties,foiir, lheMthy lffest choices. LU4-Cen(A): Improve and provide for walkability, and other nonmotorized transportation routes throughout Centers and provide links between the centers and neighborhoods. DRC (Downtown Regional Center) Purpose/Intent To maintain the Bremerton core area as supported in the 2007 Bremerton Downtown Regional Subarea Plan (DSAP) which is adopted as a functional plan as identified in the appendix. The DSAP provides a long term, coordinated outlook to help direct decision making affecting the ongoing revitalization and regeneration of the downtown. This will allow the City to continue to build upon its existing natural, social and physical assets. Location West Bremerton in the Downtown area. Land Uses Residential, Commercial, and/or Mixed use structures. Intensity/Density • 40 units per acre Various height limits as defined in DSAP. Range from four stories with some areas as market driven. Character The Downtown Regional Center (DRC) designation facilitates the ongoing creation of a vibrant, attractive downtown; a critical need for the entire West Sound region. New development is incentivized to place parking underground or within structures, not in surface lots. Street trees, well-designed public gathering areas, and lighting should be employed to create a safe, inviting experience at the street level day and night. Residents will find access to employment, transportation, and basic amenities, along with a concentration of community activities. The DRC provides housing for a wide variety of income levels in an environment that allows less reliance on the automobile. This rare juxtaposition of employment, housing, cultural, and recreation opportunities, provides the high mark for efficiency of public expenditures and infrastructure of any development envisioned in this Plan. The shared border with the nearly 400 acre Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton (as shown on next page) provides an employment boon to the DRC and the remainder of Kitsap. Each day thousands pass between the common border shared by Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton and the Downtown Regional Center. The DRC/Naval Base Kitsap relationship provides a model of intense compact development unmatched in a West Sound region typified by continued sprawl. The symbiotic nature of the DRC and Naval Base ensures the ongoing success of each respective entity, while providing an opportunity to showcase a form of urbanism to the region. Downtown Regional Center Specific Policies (for streamlining purposes, goals and policies currently addressed in the DSAP will not be repeated in this section but remain applicable). LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-DRC(A): Implement the plan for population and employment growth as detailed in the Downtown Subarea Plan to ensure that the center meets the growth expectations outlined in Puget Sound Regional Coordinating Council's Vision 2040. LU2: Encourage Economic Development LU2-DRC(A): Partner with Community Development Block Grant and other applicable programs and funding sources to encourage redevelopment in downtown. LU2-DRC(B): Utilize the slum and blight designation and other Department of Housing and Urban Development tools as appropriate to facilitate redevelopment opportunities in downtown. LU4: Promote Community Health LU4-DRC(A): Buffer surrounding communities allowing for transitional and sensitive development patterns. r r. fIN w t a x WIN 1 fl e z i r.. r w`Mw r � � dM� aw► M DC (District Center) Intent This center is intended to provide a mixed-use "Town Center" to support the surrounding neighborhoods and general public. Character & Location For specific character description and location, please see following pages. Land Uses Mixed-use, Commercial and Residential Intensity • 30 units per acre • Six to eight stories, with consideration for lower building heights to transition to Low Density Residential District Center Specific Policies: LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-DC(A): Encourage increased density that uses clustering by offering development incentives and zoning flexibility. LU1-DC(B): Encourage the implementation of design elements for new development and redevelopment that complement the designated purpose and scale of the Center and surrounding neighborhoods. Buildings should be designed to accommodate a human scale and urban livability. LU1-DC(C): Building facades shall utilize architectural features that provide for horizontal and vertical modulation. LU1-DC(D): Encourage the use of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs). LU2: Encourage Economic Development LU2-DC(A): Encourage commercial, mixed-use and higher density residential development within district cen ters. LU2-DC(B): Promote commercial infill of higher densities into district centers. LU2-DC(C): Encourage adaptive reuse and preservation of existing commercial buildings that are compatible with surrounding community. LU3: Protect the Natural Environment LU3-DC(A): Encourage compact urban environments in district centers which have existing high-intensity infrastructure and contain very few environmental sensitive areas, therefore preserving other areas in the city for open space and less intensive uses. District Center Character & Location Charleston District Center Character: This Center designation seeks to encourage redevelopment of a historic business district that has long been considered as Bremerton's second downtown with many different international appeals. The existing developments provide a variety of services for adjacent residential areas and are part of a pedestrian -oriented streetscape with potential for stories to be added above active street -level uses. The Center designation seeks to build on this existing nucleus. Areas on the surrounding blocks will be designated for mixed-use or fairly dense residential structures. Emphasis in the Charleston District Center should be on preserving the stores fronting on the streets, better utilization of existing second floor spaces, and the addition of new residential uses in the immediate vicinity. M Wheaton/Riddell District Center Character: This center will serve a regional population, some of whom must access the center by car. Higher levels of parking are retained here than in other centers. Parking is generally placed behind street -fronting buildings or moved to areas near the perimeter of the center. Careful attention is necessary in the planning and design of this center to create a pedestrian friendly environment while still accommodating a certain level of regional, auto -dependent uses. Development of the center will also need to take into consideration the fact that the area is already developed and will need to infill over a long period of time and several phases before the overall center is realized. .... . .. ...... C` Wheaton/Sheridan District Center Character: This center is anticipated to become an urban village will provide residential opportunities along a major transit route, close to downtown, and within easy pedestrian reach of a large variety of employment and shopping sites. Recognizing the surrounding neighborhood significance, existing commercial development, and the redevelopment of the Bremerton School site, there is still opportunity to serve mixed uses in a pedestrian -based urban village atmosphere. Residential units will benefit from an orientation towards the interior and green spaces. Commercial uses, mostly expected along an interior network of streets, can accommodate parking areas that do not disrupt the pedestrian design of the Center Core. EC (Eastside Employment Center) Intent Employment Centers are mixed-use environments characterized by co -location of employment activities, residential, and commercial amenities for workers. The center type allows for large scale employment activities that may draw workers from a large geographic area, where workers can also choose to live and shop near work. Location East Bremerton, just west of the Warren Avenue Bridge. Land Uses Mixed-use, Residential, Commercial, Retail and Offices. Employment Centers are anticipated to have significant commercial space for jobs that are well integrated with areas that provide a mix of housing types nearby. Mixed-use or stand-alone residential uses should be supported. Intensity • 40 units per acre • Six to eight stories Character Through mixed-use design, the Employment Center integrates employment activities with housing and commercial activities scaled to serve the employee population at the center. Development standards should support additional residential uses to the area which as a result will increase support for commercial services. Development should be compatible with minimal impacts to neighboring residential uses. Nearby living opportunities for employees will reduce commuting as well as employee parking demands. The community will be going through a transition period over the next several years with the change of Harrison Hospital campus use. The implementing regulations of the EC designation should have maximum flexibility for building re -use. Eastside Employment Center Specific Policy LU2: Encourage Economic Development LU2-EC(A): Provide flexibility in the setback, height, density, building footprint, and lot area development regulations to encourage redevelopment of this area and promote use of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs). Neighborhood Center Intent A small-scale commercial designation that serves surrounding residential areas. Character & Location For specific character description and location, please see following page. I and I Icac Mixed-use, commercial and residential. Intensity/Density • 10 to 15 units per acre, dependent on the designation. • Three or four stories Neighborhood Center Specific Policies: LU1: Plan for Growth LW-NCen(A): Preservation of a the neighborhood where significant consideration should be given to the scale, size, quality, and compatibility of future development. LW-NCen(B): Support infill with consideration of the existing built environment. LU1-NCen(C): Building facades shall utilize architectural features that provide for horizontal and vertical modulation. LU2: Encourage Economic Development LU2-NCen(A): Encourage small-scale businesses that support the surrounding residential population. LU2-NCen(B): Attract high quality housing, including mixed uses, to increase the demand for new retail services.. LU4: Promote Community Health LU4-NCen(A): Support the creation of community space that provides opportunities for social gatherings within a walkable environment. Neighborhood Center Character & Location Manette Neighborhood Center Character: The scale and design characteristics of this center will respect the existing character and built environment. This unique neighborhood center will have small commercial/mixed-use district surrounded by single family and multifamily residential neighborhoods that enjoy spectacular views to the Narrows, Sinclair Inlet, Downtown Bremerton and other points. In the Center Core, along 11th Street and vicinity, residential uses above traditional sidewalk -facing storefronts will be encouraged. The map to the right includes Neighborhood Business in pink, Multifamily Residential in brown and Low Density Residential in yellow. NB (Neighborhood Business) Purpose/Intent The intent is to provide for small-scale business districts that reflect the scale and character of surrounding neighborhoods. Mixed-use development with residential above the commercial space will be encouraged within this designation. Location Neighborhood Business should be only placed in areas that have existing small scale commercial development and can support adjacent areas. Land Uses Commercial, and Mixed -Use Residential Intensity/Density • 15 units per acre, but also must be accessory to an allowed commercial use • Three to four stories Character Small-scale commercial or mixed-use nodes with uses such as grocers in converted residential structures or purpose built structures that are sensitive to the small-scale residential context. Neighborhood Business Specific Policies LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-NB(A): Provide nearby residential areas with convenience shopping and service facilities; reduce traffic congestion; and to discourage industrial and other development capable of adversely affecting the localized commercial character. LU4: Promote Community Health LU4-NB(A): Support multimodal transportation options, including pedestrian and bicycling options, to this designation though supportive development regulations. GC (General Commercial) To provide locations for general commercial uses serving the entire community while buffering impacts to adjacent residential areas. The designation accommodates access to businesses by automobile while also creating a pedestrian -friendly, transit -supporting corridor. Location Along high traffic corridors/primary arterials as mapped such as Kitsap Way and Wheaton Way. Also includes area near 15th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, Perry Avenue, and Olympus. Land Uses Commercial uses, Mixed-use, and stand-alone residential if it is located away from major arterials. Intensity/Density • 30 units per acre • Three to five stories Character The General Commercial designation provides for intense commercial activities. It focuses growth along transportation corridors and is intended to provide appropriate locations for activities that require high levels of access by automobile traffic. Design considerations include encouraging multistory buildings near the street frontage, with street trees, attractive landscaping, benches, and frequent transit stops. Transit -oriented residential uses are appropriate on second or third floors near the street and transit stops. Office uses may also be appropriate near the street frontage. Uses in areas away from the street include parking and more intense retail uses. Special design provisions should be utilized to provide adequate buffering and transitions to less intense land uses in adjacent areas. Parking for larger commercial operations is encouraged to be located behind or beside street -fronting structures. Sites should include adequate landscaping, architectural standards, and other site design considerations to assure compatibility with neighboring uses. Stand-alone residential uses are encouraged provided they are not located on a major arterial. General Commercial Specific Policy LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-GC(A): Encourage the formation and continuance of a compatible and economically healthy environment for uses which benefit from being located in close proximity to each other; and to discourage any encroachment by uses capable of adversely affecting the basic commercial character of the district. FC (Freeway Corridor) Purpose/Intent To provide areas in the City that are regional serving in nature and scale, with signs and structures that are visible to motorists on nearby freeways, and require parking for high volumes of customers. Location Adjacent to freeways. Land Uses Commercial, Light Industrial, and Offices Intensity/Density • No density • No specific height Character The Freeway Corridor designation provides appropriate locations for large retail uses (including "big box"), other uses that generate high levels of traffic such as automobile repair and retailing, and uses requiring large amounts of outdoor display space such as new and used car sales lots. In addition, motels and hotels for travelers, and restaurants for freeway travelers may be appropriate. Development standards in this district balance a recognized need for large amounts of parking, somewhat more signage than in the typical commercial area, and large scale buildings, with good design practices. The design practices that apply will focus on adequate landscaping in parking areas, well designed and placed signs, and adequate buffering for less intensive adjacent uses. Freeway Corridor Specific Policy LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-FC(A): Encourage the formation and continuance of a compatible and economically healthy environment for uses which benefit from being located in close proximity to each other and busy highways; and to discourage any encroachment by uses capable of adversely affecting the basic commercial character of the district. HE (Higher Education) Purpose/Intent The Higher Education designation recognizes the Olympic College (OC) Campus and supporting uses. The designation provides for growth at the OC Campus, but promotes growth that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods and other nearby areas. Location In the vicinity of Olympic College, in West Bremerton near Warren Avenue Bridge Land Uses Educational Facilities, Residential (including dormitories), and Open Spaces (such as parks). Intensity/Density • 20 units per acre • Four to six stories Character This designation recognizes public collegiate campuses and the uses that may need to be developed to support the campus. Higher Education Specific Policies LU1 Plan for Growth LU1-HE(A): Provide for continued operation and facilitate managed growth of the existing major educational institutions within the City. LU1-HE(8): Provide housing options for the students in the vicinity of the college. LU4: Promote Community Health LU4-HE(A): Ensure development is consistent with the surrounding residential neighborhood. LU4-HE(8): Develop pedestrian connections between residential areas and College. Ensure street design and orientation that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use. PSIC — B (Puget Sound Industrial Center — Bremerton) Purpose/Intent Puget Sound Industrial Center — Bremerton (formerly South Kitsap Industrial Area) is an industrial employment center for which a Subarea Plan was adopted in 2012. The Subarea Plan is a functioning plan. This area has been identified by the Puget Sound Regional Council's Vision204O Plan as one of eight Manufacturing/Industrial Centers (MICS) in the Puget Sound region. This area includes important employment locations that serve both current and long-term regional economic objectives and calls for the provision of infrastructure and services necessary to serve intensive manufacturing and industrial activity. Location Located in the southwestern region of the City including the Bremerton National Airport. I nnrl I Icac Manufacturing and Industrial Activity and Supporting Commercial. Intensity/Density • No density • Market driven except some areas five stories or less to transition into the airport overlay and residential designated areas ('hnrnrtar Heavy industrial and manufacturing development that has provisions to protect the surrounding forested area. The area supports green economic development, ensures that future development will result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions versus traditional development, promotes sustainable low -impact development and environmental stewardship. Structure type should be large scale industrial scale buildings. Puget Sound Industrial Center — Bremerton Specific Policies (for streamlining purposes, goals and policies currently addressed in the PSIC-Bremerton Subarea Plan will not be repeated in this section but remain applicable) LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-PSIC(A): Implement the development standards and incentives outlined in the Subarea Plan. I (Industrial) Purpose/Intent The industrial designation is intended to accommodate heavy industrial uses in locations where there is limited interaction with residential uses. Location Primarily in the southwestern region of Bremerton. Land Uses Industrial Uses. Intensity/Density • No density • No specific height Character The district focuses on providing efficient, highly accessible sites for industry. These uses should have screening or buffers in place for bordering designations that may have less intense activities. The structure type shall be industrial in nature development. Must comply with all noise and odor regulations. In some areas of industrially designated land it will be appropriate to designate areas for mineral resource extraction. It is expected that these properties will undergo several years of extraction activities and then transition to another industrial use. Industrial Specific Policies LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-1(A): Promote the development and continued use of land for large scale basic or primary industrial purposes which involve extensive manufacturing, processing or assembly operations; and preserve sizable tracts of undeveloped land with potential for industrial use. LU2: Encourage Economic Development LU2-1(A): Support mineral resource lands that require proper management of extraction activities of mineral resource deposits. LDR (Low Density Residential) Purpose/Intent To create new and support existing single family neighborhoods. Location Residential neighborhoods located throughout the city as mapped. Land Uses Single family residential homes and low intensity compatible uses such as churches, schools, senior housing, and parks. Accessory dwelling units are encouraged. Intensity/Density • 5 to 10 dwelling units per acre • Three stories and conditionally allowed uses may be four stories Character The City's residential neighborhoods are characterized by single-family homes on traditional urban lots. There are some existing small-scale commercial structures with LDR, which should be encouraged to be redeveloped by adaptive reuses to provide services to the neighborhood. Low Density Residential Specific Policies LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-LDR(A): Promote neighborhoods that foster interaction among residents, contribute to well-being of citizenry, and create and sustain a sense of community and personal safety. LU1-LDR(B): Use front yard averaging to encourage residential infill that is consistent with the existing neighborhood's built environment. LU1-LDR(C): Allow accessory units associated with, and subordinate to, existing or new single family dwellings when appropriate. LU2: Encourage Economic Development LU2-LDR(A): Encourage adaptive reuse and preservation of existing commercial structures that are compatible with surrounding community. LU2-LDR(B): Support mineral extraction in limited areas on larger undeveloped parcels as long as there are no adverse effects on other environmental resources or living systems, or on public health, safety, and welfare. Discussion: A Mineral Resource Overlay allows for mineral extraction in areas where the grading could prep a site for future residential development, including areas in West Bremerton. LU3: Protect Natural Environment LU3-LDR(A): Proper noticing for development within or around the Mineral Resource Overlay should be given to neighboring properties. The notice should inform that resource activities are permitted in the area including a variety of activities that may not be compatible with residential use for certain periods of limited duration. LU3-LDR(8): Use the Mineral Resource overlay to serve as interim protection of mineral resource areas until a comprehensive geologic study is undertaken to determine the extent of mineral deposits. Conduct a comprehensive geologic study to identify commercial quality deposits, establish criteria so that the City may designate deposits of long-term commercial significance, recognizing that commercial quality aggregates, sand, rock and metal deposits are non-renewable resources. Such a study should be undertaken in conjunction and cooperation with other geologic studies, such as the study of aquifers, and shared with property owners. LU3-LDR(C): Prohibit development under the underlying zoning of a mineral resource reclamation site until completion of the reclamation. LU3-LDR(D): Resource designations for lands for mineral resource use may only be added or deleted during the annual review of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Any additions or deletions will be based upon submission of a geologic study, conducted by a qualified geologist, pertaining to the presence, or lack of commercial quality mineral deposits. LU3-LDR(E): Coordinate with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to ensure that future reclamation plans are consistent with the comprehensive planning for the site and surrounding area, as well as any permits issued by the DNR. LU3-LDR(F): Identify and consider classification of mineral lands of long-term commercial significance based on geologic, environmental, and economic factors, existing land uses, and land ownership. The City may consider and classify lands that have valid State surface mining permits and sites identified by individual property owners that meet the Overlay policies, City zoning standards, and the Criteria for Classifying Mineral Resource Lands (WAC 365-190-070). LU3-LDR(G): Require mineral extraction and processing operations to implement best management practices to reduce or mitigate environmental impacts in order to protect the long-term integrity of the natural environment, adjacent uses, and the productivity of the mineral lands. LU4: Promote Community Health LU4-LDR(A): Develop pedestrian connections between residential areas and neighborhood services and parks. Ensure street design and orientation that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use. MDR (Medium Density Residential) Purpose/Intent To create a designation that recognizes the existing built environment of medium density -type development and encourages redevelopment opportunities. This designation will be for neighborhoods which are primarily developed with duplexes and similar uses. Location Neighborhoods that consist primarily of duplex type structures as mapped. Land Uses Single family dwelling units (attached or detached), duplexes, and townhomes. Low intensity compatible uses such as churches, schools, senior housing, and parks. Intensity/Density • 10 dwelling units per acre • Three to four stories Character The designation consists of neighborhoods that are currently developed predominantly with duplexes. As many of these duplexes were constructed from the World War II boom, much of this area could benefit from redevelopment. By outrightly allowing duplexes, this area may be able to be revitalized and continue to provide a wide variety of housing types. This designation is similar to LDR in regards to density and scale, however medium density type development is encouraged. Medium Density Residential Specific Policies LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-MDR(A): Provide wider variety in residential designations throughout the city to achieve a greater diversity of housing. LU2: Encourage Economic Development LU2-MDR(A): Encourage adaptive reuse and preservation of existing commercial spaces that are compatible with surrounding community. LU3: Protect the Environment LU3-MDR(A): Encourage clustering to reduce total site footprint and help maintain natural hydrologic characteristics of the site. LU4: Promote Community Health LU4-MDR(A): Promote neighborhoods that foster interaction among residents, contribute to well-being of citizenry, and create and sustain a sense of community and personal safety. LU4-MDR(8): Develop pedestrian connections between residential areas and neighborhood services. Ensure street design and orientation that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use. MR (Multifamily Residential) Purpose/Intent To provide a high standard of development for residential multifamily type structures and to provide a variety of housing options for a wide diversity of people. This designation should be limited to those neighborhoods that are currently developed with multifamily housing. Location Neighborhoods that consist primarily of multifamily type structures as mapped. Land Uses Residential uses of multifamily dwelling units, townhomes, duplexes, and single family attached or detached. Supporting residential uses, such as schools, parks and churches, and nursing homes/senior complexes should be allowed within this designation. Intensity/Density • 20 units per acre • Three stories and supporting residential uses could be up to five stories Character This designation is generally for areas that generally have an existing intense level of development and includes properties that are primarily multifamily development, such as condominiums, apartments, and senior housing complex/nursing homes. Most structures are one to three story multifamily structures. Multifamily Residential Policies LU1: Plan for Growth LW-MR(A): Provide wider variety in residential designations throughout the city to achieve a greater diversity of housing. Support existing multifamily neighborhoods that enhance the quality of life for the City's existing and future residents. LU2: Encourage Economic Development LU2-MR(A): Encourage adaptive reuse and preservation of existing commercial spaces that are compatible with the surrounding community. LU3: Protect the Environment LU3-MR(A): Encourage clustering to reduce total site footprint and help maintain natural hydrologic characteristics of the site. LU4: Promote Community Health LU4-MR(A): Promote neighborhoods that foster interaction among residents, contribute to well-being of citizenry, and create and sustain a sense of community and personal safety. LU4-MR(8): Develop pedestrian connections between residential areas and neighborhood services and parks. Ensure street design and orientation that encourage pedestrian and bicycle use. BV (Bay Vista) Purpose/Intent The Bay Vista Subarea Plan (SAP) establishes the vision and the development standards for this area. The Bay Vista SAP is adopted as a functional plan within the Land Use Appendix. Bay Vista acts much like a neighborhood center. Location Located near Highway 3 and Kitsap Way. Land Uses Commercial and residential uses as identified in the Bay Vista Subarea Plan. Intensity/Density • Higher density is supported in this area • Three to seven stories Character The Bay Vista area (formerly known as West Park) began redevelopment in 2009 with supporting a Subarea Plan. The plan includes residential uses to the east and commercial uses adjacent to the Freeway and Kitsap Way. Open Space areas such as the Bay Vista Preserve are focal points of this area. Bay Vista Master Plan Specific Policies (for streamlining purposes, goals and policies currently addressed in the Bay Vista SAP will not be repeated in this section but remain applicable) LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-BV(A): Implement the land uses and development standards outlined in the Subarea Plan. EP (East Park) Purpose/Intent The East Park Subarea Plan (SAP) establishes the vision and the development standards for this area. The East Park Subarea Plan reflects Bremerton's vision to continue as the metropolitan center of the West Sound by adding a unique and dense urban neighborhood. The East Park SAP is adopted as a functional plan within the Land Use Appendix. Location Located in East Bremerton off of Lower Wheaton Way. Land Uses Commercial and residential uses as identified in the East Park Subarea Plan. High-density multi -family and commercial activities are situated along the lower Wheaton Way. Intensity/Density • Low density 10 units per acre; medium density 25 units; and high density 50 dwelling units per acre • Four to six stories Character East Park has been undergoing residential redevelopment since 2007. Redevelopment consists primarily of single family lots, but the southern portion of this area can support small commercial activity. Wildlife corridors through the subdivision connect the Madrona forest to the west with the forest creek to the west. East Park Master Plan Specific Policies (for streamlining purposes, goals and policies currently addressed in the East Park SAP will not be repeated in this section but remain applicable) LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-EP (A): Implement the land use and development standards outlined in the Subarea Plan. CUL (City Utility Lands) Purpose/Intent The City's management objectives for these lands shall be resource -related and structured to protect the watersheds and timberlands. These lands are vital to protect water quality and quantity in Bremerton, ensure a healthy forest cover, dispose of biosolids created from wastewater treatment, protect fish (including salmon), and provide essential habitat for wildlife. Location Land designated CUL is located along the west and southwest edges of the City. Land Uses While resource management is the primary objective, there are some residential or commercial activities that are allowed on utility lands such as the location of antenna sites or single family homes. Intensity/Density • 10 units per acre • Height should vary dependent on the site Character While the primary use of this land shall continue to be used for the protection of natural resources, there will continue to be a limited amount of commercial and recreation development within the lands designated as "utility." Wherever possible, co -location should be utilized for commercial structures such as antennas. Minimal footprints shall be required and all development should be limited, and demonstrate no significant environmental impact. Any future development that associates with current adjacent recreational uses (such as the Gold Mountain Golf Course or Jarstad Park) should be limited to that portion of the designation south of Old Belfair Highway and adjacent to existing similar development. Moreover, any development within this fairly pristine environment shall conform to shoreline and critical lands ordinances and be designed in an environmentally sensitive way. All developments should go through rigorous environmental review. Where development can be allowed, it should conform to the recommendations made by other regional watershed planning efforts such as the Gorst Watershed Plan. City Utility Land Specific Policies LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-CUL(A): To preserve resource -related functions of land, and to protect watersheds and timberlands. LU1-CUL(B): To provide adequate land to protects Bremerton's natural resources, while allowing for moderate residential development which does not adversely affect the lands resources. WS (Watershed Lands) Purpose/Intent The Watershed Lands designation is applied to lands for the primary purpose of protecting the City's public water supply. Lands designated WS also provide significant open space and animal habitats. Location Land designated WS is located along the west and southwest edges of the City Land Uses Uses that support watershed functions, or forest and wildlife management functions. Wireless antenna facilities may be considered on a limited basis. Intensity/Density: • No density allowed • Height that can only support the watershed functions Character This designation provides for the judicious use of publicly owned watershed property. The primary use of the property is the protection of crucial public water sources. This land is primarily part of the Union River Watershed and should continue to be totally protected. Watershed Lands Policies LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-WS(A): Coordinate measures to protect groundwater resources with watershed plans and planning efforts. LU3: Protect the Natural Environment LU3-WS(A): Prohibit or restrict development on lands that serve as critical watersheds affecting the sources of public water supply. LU3-WS(B): Assure that future land uses and land use patterns conserve and protect groundwater resources. LU3-WS(C): Protect aquifer recharge areas, especially those used to provide public water supplies. LU3-WS(D): Promote use of Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs) in Watershed Lands to protect public water supply. Specific Area Plans This Land Use Element provides goals and policies — as well as supporting technical analysis — to guide land use decisions for the broad community over the coming twenty years. More area -specific planning efforts, especially for the creation of Neighborhood Plans and more detailed implementation plans may be desirable in the foreseeable future. Specific Area Plans may add additional planning detail to this Plan's general framework. The following areas of the City and land use designations may benefit or already include specific -area planning processes: • District Centers • Neighborhood Centers • Employment Centers • Downtown Regional Subarea Plan (2007)* • Bay Vista Subarea Plan (2009)* • East Park Subarea Plan (2006)* • Puget Sound Industrial Center -Bremerton (fromerly known as the South Kitsap Indsutrial Area Subarea Plan) (2012)* • Gorst Watershed Plan and Subarea Plan (2013)** *These subarea plans have been adopted **The Gorst Watershed Plan & Subarea Plan is currently located within Bremerton's Urban Growth Area. Upon annexation this plan will be utilized as an additional functional plan to the Comprehensive Plan. Urban Growth Areas Under the Growth Management Act, each city must submit a proposed Urban Growth Area (UGA) for formal designation by its County which has jurisdiction on the issue. The UGA is an area outside of current city limits where a city is envisioned as the primary provider of urban services as growth occurs. As the future provider of services in urbanizing areas, cities are the appropriate lead agencies in establishing the future land use patterns, transportation improvements, and all related urban infrastructure. Development within the City UGAs should be regulated by the City's development standards, and infrastructure should be built to City standards. These expectations are reflected in the Countywide Planning Policies, which specify a framework for agreements between the City and the County and Bremerton for the planning and implementation of the City's assigned growth areas. Policies: LU1-UGA(A): Establish urban growth area that are large enough to accommodate the expected population growth for 20 years, in a way that meets the Countywide Planning Policies. LU1-UGA(8): Apply the adopted Citywide growth strategy consistently to all of the City's urban growth areas as a basis for more localized planning. LU1-UGA(C): Promote the efficient delivery of urban facilities and services within urban growth areas by phasing infrastructure extension in the most cost-effective manner. LU1-UGA(D): Coordinate with Kitsap County to consider development regulations, planned level of service, and infrastructure standards within the City's urban growth areas. LU1-UGA(E): Participate with Kitsap jurisdictions in the review of urban growth area boundaries relative to the Office of Financial Management's 20 -year population forecast and make adjustments, as warranted, to accommodate anticipated growth. LU1-UGA(F): Attract the majority of the county's population and employment in the City limits and urban growth areas in ways that ensure a balance among livability, preservation of environmental quality, open space retention, varied and affordable housing, high quality cost-efficient urban services, and an orderly transition from county to City jurisdiction. LU1-UGA(G): Evaluate annexations on the basis of their short and long-term community impacts and benefits. LU1-UGA(H): Support annexations that create logical boundaries and reasonable service areas within the City's urban growth areas, where the City has the fiscal capacity to provide services, while requiring property owners within an annexing area to assume a share of the city's bonded indebtedness. LU1-UGA(I): Encourage and assist property owners in existing unincorporated "islands" or "peninsulas" in the City's urban growth area to annex to the City. LU1-UGA(J): Require property owners requesting City utilities to annex concurrent with utility extensions or sign a "no -protest" agreement to annex as a part of a later, larger annexation. LU1-UGA(K): In cooperation with adjoining local governments, determine the ultimate extents of the City's physical growth and promote the designation of non -urban "separators" to define these limits. Eventual Growth Intent There is a broadly accepted notion — although a greatly misplaced one - that the growth of cities is fueled by their "greed" for land and tax revenues. Geography and money do figure into the growth equation, but not in the way that many observers may appreciate. There are two prime reasons why cities may need to expand their city limits: 1) more land is needed for new people or businesses moving to the city and there is little available land for development, and 2) the tax base of adjacent urbanizing areas that generate increasing demand on City services may be needed to pay for those services. This second reason — the need for financial ability to deliver urban services to expanding urban areas — is perhaps the more significant of the two. A city's financial capacity is driven by efficiency. Efficiency determines the cost of services to users and taxpayers, determines the level and quality of services delivered, and influences growth patterns and quality of life interests of the entire region. Bremerton's decision about growing into unincorporated areas is primarily one of cost - efficiency. Bremerton did not grow in population for several decades, and the loss of significant retail activity was a part of this stagnation. The City's physical expansion could not be justified by past growth trends. However, changing demographics, downtown revitalization, and regional growth policies suggest a much different growth future for the community. The City has a legitimate interest in land to grow — the future will not be a continuation of the past trends. The map on the next page illustrates the City's desired eventual growth intent. The City believes that our associated urban growth areas (UGA's), as well as the Central Kitsap area, has a future with the City. Routes of travel, responsiveness of emergency services, disposal of waste, opportunity for recreation, access to goods and services and all other urban functions are common to all these UGA's. Eventual annexation and incorporation of associated UGA's and the Central Kitsap UGA will help the City achieve the expectation that it become the regional growth center of Kitsap as outlined in the Puget Sound Regional Council's regional growth strategy "Vision 2040." Equivalence Table As discussed in the previous section of this chapter, the Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) are areas within the County that the City will be expanding into as the city grows. To assist with that transition of annexation, the following chart illustrates equivalent Kitsap County Land Use designations to corresponding City designation for all the City's UGAs. For some of the City's UGAs, we have lead subarea planning efforts, such as Gorst and Puget Sound Industrial Center — Bremerton (formerly the South Kitsap Industrial Center). For those areas, their adopted Subarea Plan's designation would become enacted at the point of annexation. K trap County Kitsap County Afilowed Uses City of Ct7B Land Land Use Zoning Bremerton,Consistent Qistrict (CoBylandl Use Zoning �quiva.leh Urban and Business Intended to provide for integrated grouping General General Rural Industrial Center of medium to large size businesses within an Commercial Commercial attractive park -like setting. The Zone allows business dedicated to office use, warehousing, and/or light manufacturing operations. Permitted businesses are intended to support the creation, development and retention of primary wage employment in the professional and technical fields. Business Park Provides for integrated grouping of small to General General medium size businesses within an attractive Commercial Commercial park -like setting. The zone allows flexibility in the amount of space within each business dedicated to office use, warehousing, and/or light manufacturing operations. Permitted businesses are intended to support the creation, development and retention of primary wage employment in the professional and technical fields, and not intended for the general retail commercial needs of the area. Industrial Allows a wide range of industrial activities Industrial Industrial including heavy industry such as fabrication, warehousing, processing of raw materials, bulk handling and storage, construction, and heavy transportation. This zone is intended to provide sites for activities which require processing, fabrication, storage, and wholesale trade. Kftsap ou°nty Kftsap County Al'fowed Uses City of C16 Land, Land Use Zoning Bremerton Corsistori Distr[ct- (CO°B')1and Llse Zoning glliva.ferit- Urban Low Neighborhood Provide for the quick stop shopping needs of Neighborhood Neighborhood Intensity Commercial the immediate neighborhood in which they Business Business Commercial are located. These centers should be based upon demonstrated need and shall be sized in a manner compatible with a residential setting. Urban Low- Urban Applied to areas within urban growth areas that Low Density Low Density Density Restricted have been identified with a significant Residential Residential Residential concentration of critical areas regulated, or are planned as greenbelts, and are therefore appropriate for lower-density development. Greenbelt Applied to those areas which have identified Low Density Low Density parcels constrained by critical areas of fifty Residential Residential percent or greater and are within certified wildlife corridors. Urban Low Recognize, maintain, and encourage urban low Low Density Low Density Residential density residential areas by including a full range Residential Residential of urban services and facilities that are adequate at the time of development. Urban Urban Intended to provide for higher densities where a Medium Density Medium Density Medium- Medium full range of community services and facilities Residential Residential Density Residential are present or will be present at the time of Residential development. Urban High- Urban High Provide for multiple-family residential and Multifamily Multifamily Density Residential professional office development based upon Residential Residential Residential compatibility with surrounding land uses. The primary use of this zone is intended to be high density residential. Professional office use is intended to compliment and support the residential use within the zone. Public Facilities Parks Parks and County facilities are located within this Low Density Low Density zone. The City does not have a Parks specific Residential Residential zone and delineates these areas to low density residential. Open Space This Comprehensive Plan adopts by reference the "Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan" as adopted and amended by City Council. These goals and Policies help to establish a system of open space in Bremerton. That open space system will consist of parks, school yards, and natural spaces. In addition, the cited goal and its policies call for linking these spaces with a system of trails and pedestrian pathways. The Open Space Map depicts the open space system on the following page of this element. Many of the lands and corridors appearing on the Open Space Map are not independent land use designations. Instead, they indicate desired locations for open spaces. "Open Space" as a listed "permitted use" in all zoning designations will support the creation of this desired open space system. Public acquisition of open space, including acquisition and development of open space as part of City utility or street projects for example, will also assist in the creation of trails, parks, or other open spaces. Policies LU1: Plan for Growth LU1-OP(A): Implement the development standards outlined in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. Consider using permeable surfacing in open space areas where feasible. LU3: Natural Environment LU3-OP(A): Integrate an open space system into the land use pattern that increases the amount of open space, protects Bremerton's natural resources, allows for stormwater management including LID BMPs in open spaces, and provides a source of beauty and enjoyment for all residents. LU3-OP(B): Encourage open space along water ways to ensure public access both visually and physically. LU3-OP(C): Promote open vistas and green spaces (greenbelts) in the City. LU4: Community Health LU4-OP(A): Include pedestrian, bicycle, and passive recreation opportunities into open spaces. Y . 1N lh'VA; I`1a.1 i i : I - �� — F LL I•• L r••f•• 1hV ti`,I`l fd is IN 0 ux 6 wo6oolA F (6 J 0) o T 0 p U r' .. I 1 1 IV /Ib • 00 M - IAV iV 1l:�VN1 U) Y -p y 0 • . dlmlmf .I r bi — W • • �ti — — cf� '��"/F -6 N O a..� 6. o N 0 N d� i !Ivry :` a� aivr,� 1 - O p Q Y Q p 0 i �✓ o' Av :...✓ i N C1il YT r "., .,'fPK �S MIt, fa, u vt i n_nvrl=, r Nv i ' �Sl re r r••' r, _• t E Vvy �•�V ._• I r._.+ .`. �,��� �•_ Wil` fiy � � 'i1 _ Ls -•�"� �� art*lawF� — — I > 1r .r 2 ,4�1PL 7197P97C'.P'P -•� ... J 5- _••_ _..I C J l (M rr1 71 NNAVAI -nr✓IH _ 1 e� . .._ " • �fllF U4 f,{CI WfkiV N�L+ _.._.. _.._.. _.. r tet,. ! a♦ 1 f A .=In • Q 75 � w l I , _. w.._ /1 I O Lr) Housing Contents HousingIntroduction................................................................................................................................ H-4 Vision......................................................................................................................................................... H-6 Goals& Policies......................................................................................................................................... H-6 HousingGoals....................................................................................................................................... H-6 HousingPolicies.................................................................................................................................... H-7 Implementing Policies for Goal HI: .................................................................................................. H-7 Implementing Policies for Goal H2: .................................................................................................. H-7 Implementing Policies for Goal H3: .................................................................................................. H-8 Implementing Policies for Goal H4: .................................................................................................. H-9 City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan H-3 Housing Element Element 3 Housing Introduction Housing Introduction The housing element focuses on the most basic function of community living, shelter for the local population. As a metropolitan City, Bremerton is expected to grow substantially over the next 20 years. This document intends to identify ways to accommodate the anticipated population growth while protecting existing single family areas. In order to quantify Bremerton's housing needs, significant amounts of data have been collected and reviewed. A full analysis of this data is available in the Housing Appendix. Population growth of the City is anticipated to grow from 39,650 residents to 53,407 residents by the year 2036, and the number of housing units associated with that growth is approximately 6,400 new units. In order to effectively accommodate this growth without detracting from our existing attractive neighborhoods, the City has established goals and policies that will guide growth of housing towards designated Centers and by targeting infill towards areas with large lots and or areas that have deteriorated housing stock. Before addressing the goals and policies for future growth, it is essential to reflect backwards to understand how past growth has shaped Bremerton's current conditions. Originally founded in conjunction with its major employer, the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard', Bremerton's distinctive neighborhoods have survived various growth cycles. The most impactful was the housing boom associated with World War II in the 1940's. At the height of the war, housing stock came under severe stress when the population grew from approximately 15,000 to 72,500 seemingly overnight. That housing crisis still influences the type, size, cost and quality of existing housing stock available today. The end of World War II signaled a population decline in the 1950s and 1960s. Since then, Bremerton's population has remained mostly unchanged. Some minor increases and decreases of as many as 2,000 people have been seen over the last 40 years; however these changes are negligible (approximately 1%) and easily dismissed amid Bremerton's regular fluctuations in the military population. The lack of growth over the last 40 years, despite land use capacity, continues to elude growth forecasts. The 2010 Census count identified 37,729 residents and the 2014 census estimate shows approximately 38,180 residents. While this is an increase, it is not as substantial of an increase as growth forecasts had anticipated in the 2004 update of the Comprehensive Plan. More importantly, Bremerton's growth is has not kept pace with surrounding county and regional areas where unprecedented growth has occurred. Between 1980 and 2010 Kitsap County as a whole witnessed a population increase of nearly 60%, and since 2000 the County's population has continued to grow by 12%. Bremerton on the other hand has had negligible growth between 2000 and 2010 of +470 people, or 0.01%. ' The term "Puget Sound Naval Shipyard (PSNS)" is used interchangeably throughout the Comprehensive Plan with "Naval Base Kitsap (NBK)." It is recognized that Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton is comprised of the Navy's area and Controlled Industrial Area that has multiple large employers, with Puget Sound Naval Shipyard as the largest tenant that has the most direct impact with Bremerton. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan H-4 Housing Element Element 3 Housing Introduction To understand this gap, the City has evaluated national and regional housing trends which provide insights into differences between Bremerton's housing market and other local markets. In terms of supply, Bremerton does not have as many green field or empty canvas opportunities as are available in other parts of the County. While infrastructure is often more expensive to construct in these areas, they often represent a less complicated site development than infill typically requires. In terms of demand, Bremerton's somewhat outdated housing stock, dating back to the previous growth periods of the 1940s and 1960s, often fails to address today's contemporary market demands. Market demands and demographic changes have occurred in areas such as household type, size income level, and special needs that make Bremerton's existing housing stock less desirable than newer more modern homes being developed elsewhere. Planning for Bremerton's unique existing population and allowing flexibility to accommodate for growing demographic groups is essential. For example, there has been a substantial growth of senior citizens, singles, and single parent households throughout the region, which indicates a need for greater diversity in housing type. Accounting for the unique needs of the military population associated with the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is also an important factor. Bremerton has a higher than average number of rental properties, high turnover rates, and lower household size than other neighboring cities. These rates are often associated with a more transient population typically found in cities with high military populations. Ensuring adequate housing options for the military is critical for the City's growth. The overall income levels of the Bremerton's population cannot be overlooked in developing a successful growth strategy according to the 2010 census. 20.4% of Bremerton's residents are currently below the poverty line, compared to 10.4% in Kitsap County as a whole. Bremerton's median household income is $43,183, compared to Kitsap County's median $62,413. The median home value in Bremerton is $194,700, compared to $268,000 in Kitsap County2. This is a sign that cost and choice of housing are problematic for much of the existing population. In order for Bremerton to compete with the housing market in surrounding areas, the Comprehensive Plan must carefully balance the needs of existing residents with the anticipated needs of the future population. Special consideration must be paid to the economic diversity and resource scarcity within the community. Ensuring Bremerton remains an affordable City for its residents is critical. New growth must be strategically located to achieve a new, more intense and vibrant urban setting without detracting from existing attractive single family neighborhoods. The following goals and policies of the Housing Element intend to ensure the rediscovery of Bremerton as a great place to live. Z Data is from the 2010 Census and Kitsap County Assessor records. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan H-5 Housing Element Element 3 Housing Vision, Goals & Policies Vision To encourage the grolAfth of Bremertons° e iP ° P ° i g a wide variety Thousing s throughout the City in a INOY that ect the environment and fosters community health. Goals & Policies The following goals and policies form the foundation of Bremerton's housing strategy for the future. These goals and policies are to support the overall housing vision stated above. Housing Goals 14.1. Protect ar)d erMarxe, Brei e or)" ° t r)P quality hp°°ir)P stock. Pm Frwourage the developinernP P Ptior)s ar)d dermities fp rneet the P m Support access to qualify ar)d affordable housir)gfor all Pim rn ror) residerns. 144. Irnplernern ar)d coordir)ate strategies that prornote public ar)d private efforts to City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan H-6 Housing Element Element 3 Housing Vision, Goals & Policies Housing Policies Ml 1hU.: Protect aind ennhance Bireurneir oin' exi '� ing quAity 1ho a ing stocic. Implementing Policies for Goal 1-11: H1(A): Promote preservation of structures in good repair, including establishing incentives that encourage private property owner's efforts to preserve homes having historical and or architectural significance. H1(B): Support replacement of substandard structures, including encouraging rehabilitation and maintenance of existing housing units; or replacing substandard structures which have excessive rehabilitation costs with new structures. H1(C): Promote, and incentivize, private commitments to improve existing housing stock so that all housing is safe, sanitary, and in good repair. H1(D): Promote financial assistance for essential repairs to substandard structures that provide housing for low and moderate income persons. H1(E): Enhance livability in neighborhoods by maintaining and upgrading City services such as sidewalks, bike lanes, parks, and utilities in order to enhance the overall affordability and health of the community. H1(F): Promote a robust code enforcement program to protect the safety and aesthetic quality of existing neighborhoods. H1(G): Promote a sense of community within existing neighborhoods by creating spaces where residents can interact by encouraging walkability, and supporting identification if distinctive neighborhoods. Ml lh°1 ': Enc urage the eel 1purnein't of a vairiety of inew lh o u ming optioins ain deinsitiesto irneetthe t':Ilh ainguiing ineeds f Bireiirneirtoin's iresideints. Implementing Policies for Goal 1-12: H2(A): Support the private sector's efforts to provide a full range of housing options to meet the needs of all ages and demographics. H2(B): Encourage new development to blend with positive characteristics of surrounding neighborhoods. H2(C): Supporting infill development and increased densities and the use of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure efficient and cost effective utilization of existing public utilities. H2(D): Enhance livability in neighborhoods by upgrading and installing sidewalks, bike lanes, parks, safety improvements and utilities in order to enhance livability. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan H-7 Housing Element Element 3 Housing Vision, Goals & Policies H2(E): Support efforts to provide for a variety of housing options such as: • Emergency group housing, homeless shelters and short term housing to meet the needs of those in the lower income categories. • Promote housing for the special needs of students, particularly in the vicinity of Olympic College. Encourage apartments and dormitories in locations that directly service the college. • Plan for and support episodic surges and reductions in military personnel. Provide opportunities to allow for different housing densities to accommodate the diverse needs of military personnel. • Respond to the special needs of the growing elderly population within the City. Encourage a full range of housing options including retirement housing complexes in all residential zones particularly in areas with direct proximity to services and amenities. Encourage programs which allow elderly to remain in their homes as long as possible. • Provide for integration of special needs housing within the community by allowing for government -assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured housing, group homes, and foster care facilities. • Encourage construction to meet and exceed ADA standards whenever possible. H2(F): Promote a sense of community, or gathering places, within new neighborhoods by creating spaces where residents can interact. H2(G): Partner with Community Development Block Grant and other applicable programs and funding sources to encourage removal or abatement of blighting influences in and around residential areas. oMl lh°M Support accessto qu4lityaind affour� ab e lhouiingfour MIIII Bireurneirtoin ire i eints. Implementing Policies for Goal 1-113: H3(A): Provide opportunities for the production of new housing for all incomes, ages, and family types through infill by stimulating growth of non-traditional housing types such as townhomes, carriage units, accessory dwelling units, and duplexes in locations where they will seamlessly infill into the fabric of the existing neighborhoods. H3(B): Disperse below market rate, publicly assisted, affordable, and rental housing throughout the City in away that accommodates Bremerton's fair share of the Countywide need. Disperse such housing throughout the City to avoid concentrations in any particular area and encouraging development close to employment and public transportation. H3(C): Support increased densities and infill projects and the use of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs) in order to capitalize on the cost efficiency of utilization of existing utility services. Additionally, encourage maintenance of City services such as sidewalks, bike lanes, parks, and utilities in order to enhance the overall affordability and health of the community. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan H-8 Housing Element Element 3 Housing Vision, Goals & Policies H3(D): Encourage expanded availability of incentives for development within the City such as the Multifamily Tax Exemption, Community Empowerment Zone, Historically Underutilized Business zone, etc. H3(E): Eliminate unnecessary regulatory impediments to the development of affordable housing. Ml 1h A.: l urnl eurneint aind coo ruinato stirategiesthat l ururn te l ubl l is aind l urui ato efforts to fa':uilllurtate uiurmmll ur'eurTiein : : :Ilhe 1housiing stocIllcv Implementing Policies for Goal 1-14: H4(A): Promote private and public efforts to provide adequate capital for rehabilitation of housing projects; such efforts should include commitments to remove or abate blighting influences near or within residential areas. H4(B): Promote financial assistance for low and moderate incomes that assist inessential repairs to substandard structures. Support private sector low interest loan programs for such repairs, combined with public resources when available. H4(C): Target and enhance the use of tax incentives to improve affordable housing throughout the City, and particularly in Centers where housing is intended to be in close proximity to public transportation and employment. H4(D): Encourage efficient permit review by eliminating unnecessary regulatory impediments, improving certainty in development regulations, and provide an expedited permit process. H4(E): Aim to improve coordinated, effective planning programs that improve access to affordable housing. Specifically promote intergovernmental cooperation and agreements that support strategies and programs to achieve City housing goals. H4(F): Promote increased housing density to provide a broader customer base for more affordable public services including utilities. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan H-9 Housing Element Economic Development Contents Introduction........................................................................................................................................... ED'4 Vision...................................................................................................................................................... ED'7 Goals& Policies ...................................................................................................................................... ED'7 Economic Development Goals ........................................................................................................... ED'7 Economic Development Policies ........................................................................................................ ED'8 Implementing Policies for Goal EDI: ............................................................................................. ED'8 Implementing Policies for Goal ED2:............................................................................................. ED'8 Implementing Policies for Goal ED3:............................................................................................. ED'9 Implementing Policies for Goal ED4:............................................................................................. ED'9 Implementing Policies for Goal EDS:........................................................................................... ED'10 City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan BD -3 Bcnnnn-dc Development Element Element 4 Economic Development Introduction Introduction The State of Washington has recognized the need to promote economic competitiveness in community planning efforts. While not a required element of the Comprehensive Plan, this Element is strongly encouraged due to the clear connection between businesses and their critical role in providing for a vibrant, healthy City. The Economic Development Element asserts the need for Bremerton to grow its economy into the Metropolitan City it has been designated to become. This Element puts a priority on both retention of existing competitive businesses and diversifying by encouraging new development that increases activity levels within all commercial areas, especially mixed use centers. At the same time, the Element works to highlight and enhance the qualities that make Bremerton a wise investment, such as its prime waterfront, regionally significant location, and its existing quality infrastructure. With Bremerton's excellent location, it is only a matter of time before the City realizes an unprecedented economic vitality. The City of Bremerton is 14,800 acres, or approximately 23 square miles and is located at the geographic center of the Puget Sound Region. It is only 11 miles across the water from Seattle and just 33 miles northwest of Tacoma off State Highway 16. The Washington State Ferry system conveniently links downtown Bremerton to downtown Seattle, providing unobstructed automobile access, and a unique feature in comparison to other satellite cities around Seattle. State highways tie Bremerton and the Puget Sound Industrial Center -Bremerton (including the Bremerton National Airport), to Tacoma on the south, and to the Hood Canal Bridge on the north, Puget Sound's link to the Olympic Peninsula. Residents, visitors, and Bremerton -based businesses benefit from this unparalleled regional access as well as the City's favorable size for operations and management. In fact, Bremerton is the largest incorporated City in the West Sound, with a population of approximately 38,000 and has more jobs than the combined markets of Gig Harbor and Silverdale'. 1 Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, WA - 2013 Covered Employment Estimates City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan ED -4 Economic Development Element Element 4 Economic Development Bremerton is regionally significant due to the deep water port, home to a state ferry terminal, public marina and the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard - the West Sound's largest employer. The City's major employers include the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Olympic College and for now, Harrison Hospital. The Puget Sound Naval Shipyard has long been the City's principal economic base despite its federal exemption from paying local taxes and property assessments. Approximately 48 percent of jobs in the City of Bremerton in 2013 were government employment (public sector). Shipyard activities strongly affect the City's population demographics and land use development. Commercial activities are often strategically located near PSNS access points, including automobile oriented business on the edges of Charleston, near the shipyard's main gate on Naval Avenue. Prior to the Great Recession, Bremerton was growing in almost every sector at rates faster than had been seen for nearly 50 years. While much of that growth stagnated with the economic downturn, significant advances in terms of upgrades to public facilities and infrastructure progressed. As the economy nationwide is beginning to grow once more, Bremerton is also witnessing growth, particularly in the Downtown region. Development patterns include the permitting of three different multi- family projects totaling nearly 500 new residential units in Downtown alone. A 10 screen movie theater has been constructed, many restaurants and small businesses are thriving and more are anticipated to come. In 2013, in order to encourage businesses to locate in Bremerton, the City began raising the level of exemption from its Business and Occupation tax annually in $20,000 increments. Currently (as of 2015), the first $140,000 of a business' gross receipts are exempt from this tax. In 2014, the City saw a net gain of 750 active business licenses from the previous year, and that number has been increasing annually since 2008. Introduction Norm Dicks Government Center Harrison Hospital's recent decision to relocate to Silverdale is anticipated Downtown Bremerton to significantly impact the overall economic vitality of Bremerton in the Development near future; however, this departure can be viewed as an opportunity for another large employer to fill the gap. Olympic College is growing rapidly and now offers four year degrees from both Western Washington University and Washington State University. Significant investments into the campus and surrounding area have been witnessed and are forecasted to continue into the future. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element ED -5 Element 4 Economic Development Introduction Economic development requires partnerships across jurisdictional lines, especially to enjoy the benefits of a shared economy that does not contain itself to political boundaries. The City has been working collaboratively with all jurisdictions within Kitsap County and extending further to the greater Puget Sound Region. Significant growth of Seattle has placed higher demands on its surrounding Cities. As Bremerton is only a ferry ride away from downtown Seattle, it is anticipated that development of the City will increase due to this proximity. The City of Bremerton is reemerging as a commercial, residential, and cultural center in the region. Downtown is the first of the City's designated centers, with its own adopted Subarea Plan to assure a quality setting for new investments. This focused economic activity, with the subsequent protection of quality residential neighborhoods, will lead to new vibrancy and economic well-being City-wide. The total number of jobs in the City of Bremerton for 2013 is over 28,000, compared to 32,000 in unincorporated Kitsap County2. The City's share of jobs in relation to its geographical size (30 square miles), in comparison with the County's size (566 square miles) is representative of the City's status as a metropolitan area. The Appendix to this chapter provides available data regarding Bremerton's economic conditions. Z Puget Sound Regional Council, Seattle, WA - 2013 Covered Employment Estimates City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan ED -6 Economic Development Element E-lement 4 Economic Development Vision, Goals & Policies Vision As the only Metropolitan City Within Kitsap County, Bremerton expects to substantially expand employment andjob varietyv hB next 20 years to support B° grolAting economy and lifestyle dii t Within the region. Goals & Policies The following goals and policies form the foundation of Bremerton's economic development strategy for the future. These goals and policies are to support the overall economic development vision stated above. Economic Development Goals MI. Support exharnior) o,,f cornine°ire, hive^eain)ar)d eKpar)dir)g Brerne°rtor)"s cornineirial base. EDD. Revitalize ^ Bre,rnertor)"s° cornineirioi districts by ohBror ir)g ar)d e^i,fiiarwir)g the oesthe^tie° hooiith of existi r), ofi rABs ar)d s°tree,°t„ rornoBes EDI Facilitate, physical improve: me°rns to cornine°irioi districts through too h°xer)ti B ves, i�°ate .ore�.r��°ne, ° toih�.oBro�°ns ar) private^-hohiicpartrie„rshihs. e„eoBr)iee^ the, relatiornhi hetive°er) tram ortotior) ar e°eorwini edevelopinern by ivorkir)g collaboratively ivith other Boverrunes°rnal ager°xies° to improve, inoiti-inoe of trornportoti or) ohtiorn ar)d routes. BttB. Advarxe, elfforts to establish o regiorpoihercehtior) of Brerne°rtoy°) as o ivelcornir)g, attractive, or)os°i �.ie��� i""i �°�e,^s°s„ h � thm City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan ED -9 Economic Development Element Element 4 Economic Development Vision, Goals & Policies Economic Development Policies Ml EDL Support exl � insi in of coiirT urneirce by diveirsifyiing aind exl � indiing Bireurneir oin' coiirnurneurc4l� I a e Implementing Policies for Goal ED1: ED1(A): Attract new employment opportunities throughout the city by utilizing incentives for redevelopment of underutilized sites, such as encouraging adaptive re -use of existing commercial buildings. ED1(B): Increase market elasticity and diversity of businesses by supporting a wide variety of commercial uses within the designated mixed use Centers throughout the City. ED1(C): Entice development of start-up and small businesses by supporting home occupation businesses, incubator businesses, and mobile vendors. Educate property owners in development options and interests. ED1(D): Actively seek living wage jobs that benefit a broad cross-section of residents and encourage educational opportunities such as higher education and workforce training programs. ED1(E): Support and encourage annexations when appropriate. Continue to monitor land supply and availability for development sites throughout the city. Ml ED 2. Re ftMize Bireiirneirtoin's coiirnurneurt':Wll districts by upgradiing aind einh anciingthe aesthetic quAfty of exi 'dng lbufldiings aind stireetfirointages. Implementing Policies for Goal ED2: ED2(A): Encourage upgrades and rehabilitation of existing commercial developments through a wide variety of means, including but not limited to: Promote decorative street lighting, window displays, increased security, and pedestrian public amenities (trash cans, benches, etc.). • Consider recognition, preservation, and repair of historic storefronts and signage such as McGavin's Bakery that emphasize quintessential elements from our past in areas such as Downtown, Manette, and Charleston. • Investigate outdated and obsolete elements of building frontages such as fagade treatment and signage. Encourage maintenance, repair, and enhancement focusing on pedestrian scale enhancements. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan ED -6 Economic Development Element E-lement 4 Economic Development Vision, Goals & Policies ED2(B): Ensure new development promotes street level activation to encourage walkability and social interaction through site and fagade design, including but not limited to the following: • Design standards should be required for new commercial structures, especially in Centers, that ensure buildings and site layouts are designed with a focus on pedestrian scale such as intersection anchoring, strategically locating parking to the rear of structures, recognizable access ways, promotion of weather protection etc. • Promote the use of the design review board to ensure aesthetic quality, pedestrian scale of new buildings, and flexibility of development standards within the Downtown Regional Center for both new construction and substantial remodel of existing structures. M� ED 3. Of°°ac llftate l lh ysit':Muiurmm iir'oveiirTieiiri'ts'to coi mmurmmeurt':4ll distirictsthirough 'tax uinceinti e , uiin :eurgeurinurmmein all pirogiraiirns,mind Ipirui ate 1p ubl is I1pairtineirshmuilps. Implementing Policies for Goal ED3: ED3(A): Pursue regional and state investment interests through lobbying and relationship -building, highlighting Bremerton as a stable, appealing community committed to partnerships and collaboration. ED3(B): Encourage rehabilitation programs, grant funding, and Local Improvement Districts for clean- up/repair of existing structures and infrastructure improvements especially in designated mixed use cen ters. ED3(C): Pursue state legislation, programs, and tax strategies to aid business districts in attracting and retaining a diverse commercial base. Expand existing strategies such as the Multi -Family Tax Exemption and the Empowerment Zone citywide as appropriate. Mm 0004. Recoginiz,e throe urelllati in llhmuill Ilbe : eeurm iir,ain ll it"ta,tii urm and economic e elll 1piirneint by wor1ding cd1laboirativOy with otheir goveiirniirnentMageincies't [irnpirove urndlht i �urmm alll :ur'ain llpur"ta'tui in optioins and iroutes. Implementing Policies for Goal ED4: ED4(A): Pursue alternative transportation monies, including federal dollars typically spent on the interstate system, for fast ferry research and other multi -modal investments and improvements. ED4(B): Ensure access to commerce by focusing commercial development along existing transportation corridors. Support expansion of transportation systems and facilities to improve access to the Bremerton National Airport, the Naval Base Kitsap/Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Downtown, and the designated District Centers. ED4(C): Work with Kitsap Transit to enhance access to commerce during standard business hours, nights, and weekends. ED4(D): Coordinate with the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and the Washington State Ferry Service to work towards reducing parking demands and traffic influxes from commuter and shipyard workers on City streets. Continue to limit surface parking as it does not promote economic development of the City. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan ED -9 Economic Development Element Element 4 Economic Development Vision, Goals & Policies Ml ED 5. Advaince effortsto establ l i h a ur�egui ur4ll l eircepti in of Bireurneir oin as a relcoiirnuiing, attractive and b a mine fur�uien 111 ity. Implementing Policies for Goal ED5: ED5(A): Evaluate and work towards efficiency and effectiveness of all permit processes to ensure requirements and timelines are predictable. Encourage City Departments and Staff to provide condensed development guides to applicants that help identify code requirements. ED5(B): Encourage a wide variety of marketing and tourism efforts that provide a welcoming sense such as: • Supporting the installation of way finding signs to business districts, parks, and regional attractions within the City. • Partner with private and public agencies to publicize community services and amenities. • Support efforts of local business and associations to attract new business and visitors from outside the City. • Support tourist attractions and amenities, by advocating for enhanced and regular ferry service between Bremerton and Seattle. ED5(C): Encourage community engagement and civic activities within Centers by promoting recreational activities and community events as these activities tend to enhance a sense of community and support local commerce. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan ED -6 Economic Development Element ��oMrILL wi 1 Transportation Introduction......................................................................................................................T-4 Purpose.................................................................................................................................................. T-4 PlanningRequirements..........................................................................................................................T-4 Growth Management Act(GMA).......................................................................................................T-5 OtherPlans.........................................................................................................................................T-6 Role of the Transportation Element......................................................................................................T-7 PublicOutreach..................................................................................................................................T-7 RegionalCoordination...........................................................................................................................T-8 TechnicalAppendix................................................................................................................................T-8 Vision..........................................................................................................................................................T-9 Goals& Policies..........................................................................................................................................T-9 TransportationGoals.............................................................................................................................T-9 TransportationPolicies..........................................................................................................................T-9 Implementing Policies for Goal TI: .................................................................................................... T-9 Implementing Policies for Goal T2: .................................................................................................. T-12 Implementing Policies for Goal T3: .................................................................................................. T-12 Implementing Policies for Goal T4: .................................................................................................. T-14 Implementing Policies for Goal T5: .................................................................................................. T-15 Transportation Introduction Bremerton is a city rich in history and beauty. Over the years, Bremerton's character has evolved— from its early naval and shipyard roots that supported more than 80,000 people at the height of World War II to one of America's most livable cities. Bremerton has continued to grow aided by its position as a major employment center and transportation hub for Kitsap County. Today, Bremerton is the largest city in Kitsap County with a population of 39,000. Many employers and attractions call Bremerton home, including the largest employer in the county, Naval Base Kitsap. This Transportation Element aims to provide a 20 -year vision for Bremerton's transportation system, which respects the community's history and character, supports anticipated growth in the region, and builds on Bremerton's momentum as an attractive community in which to live, work, and play by supporting safe and comfortable travel by all modes through 2036. Purpose The vision for Bremerton's Transportation Element is to promote, manage, and maintain a safe, efficient, and integrated multi -modal transportation system that is consistent with the City's overall vision and adequately serves anticipated growth. Guidance from City staff, the Planning Commission, stakeholders, and citizens helped identify several priorities: • Improve safety for all users through updated facilities and street designs that accommodate all modes • Create an interconnected multimodal network that connects all users to City Centers and major destinations within Bremerton as well as Kitsap County impact• Coordinate with local and regional partners to ensure that travel patterns do not disproportionately « «- quality of • Increase transportation spending on maintaining, preserving, and operating the existing MMEMZEMMH= The Transportation Element sets a framework for understanding, prioritizing, measuring, and creating a transportation network to help Bremerton achieve its vision. Planning Requirements Bremerton's location in the region plays an important role in the demands put on its transportation system. The City is located directly west of Seattle, across the Puget Sound, on the Kitsap Peninsula. The city is divided by the Port Washington Narrows, a straight spanned by two bridges, the Warren Avenue Bridge and Manette Bridge, which connect the eastern and western sides of the city. With direct access to Seattle, Bremerton is influenced by many regional travelers and trends. Several state routes are located within the city including SR 3, SR 304, SR 310, and SR 303, which connect to important regional job centers and destinations in Kitsap County. The City must coordinate its transportation planning with a variety of jurisdictions, including Kitsap County, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), the State of Washington, the US Navy, Kitsap Transit, the Suquamish Tribe, along with the Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council. Figure 1 shows the location of Bremerton in this regional setting. Figure 1: Regional Map 0 13 Growth Management Act (GMA) The State's Growth Management Act of 1990 requires communities to prepare a transportation plan that ties directly to the City's land use decisions and financial planning. This Transportation Element Update fulfills the mandate. Additionally, given the number of state routes that begin and end in Bremerton, this plan aims to coordinate with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to ensure that these state facilities can adequately serve the region's needs. Other Plans The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) is the region's metropolitan planning organization made up of cities, towns, counties, ports, tribes, transit agencies, and major employers. PSRC has set policy for King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap Counties through Vision 2040, which lays out the long-term goals for growth management, economic, and transportation issues. Vision 2040 identifies several key goals for transportation in the region: • Maintenance,Safety — Maintain, preserve, and operate the existing transportation system in a safe and usable state. • Support the Growthr — Support the regional growth strategy by focusing on connecting centers with a highly efficient multimodal transportation network. • Greater Options, Mobility, and Access — Invest in transportation systems that offer greater options, mobility, and access in support of the regional growth strategy. In addition to those priorities, the multicounty planning policies in VISION 2040 and the strategies in Transportation 2040 call for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to impacts related to climate change. VISION 2040 (page 42) has an overview of climate change and related policies and page 34 in Transportation 2040 for information on the four-part greenhouse gas reduction strategy (land use, user fees, choices, and technology). The plan already includes policies that support positive actions to reduce greenhouse gases, such as promoting transit and increasing nonmotorized transportation options. Climate Change and greenhouse emission policies are addressed in this element and within the Environmental element. This Transportation Element is consistent with the Vision 2040 priorities. The Puget Sound Industrial Center (PSIC), formerly known as South Kitsap Industrial Area (SKIA), is one of eight Puget Sound Regional Council's designated manufacturing/industrial centers. Located in southwest Bremerton, it encompasses approximately 3,700 acres planned for industrial development and use. Following annexation, the PSIC-Bremerton Subarea Plan' was established with a vision to: • Strive for 10,000 new jobs throughout a 20 -year planning horizon • Encourage development while minimizing greenhouse gas emissions • Incentivize sustainable development • Have a clear plan for future infrastructure. This Transportation Element is consistent with the PSIC-Bremerton Subarea Plan's vision to develop a complete transportation system that supports all modes of travel and all potential users of the site. The transportation improvements from PSIC-Bremerton are included in this document. 1 Formerly known as the South Kitsap Industrial (SKIA) Subarea Plan Role of the Transportation Element The transportation element provides a framework that outlines the policies, projects, and programs necessary to implement the City's vision of future mobility in and through the City of Bremerton. The transportation element also describes the financial environment for implementing projects out to 2036. In essence, the Transportation Element informs the development of the Capital Improvement Program by identifying the types of projects the City should undertake to support future travel trends. The plan also evaluates how these projects coincide with the community's values and financial resources. Public Outreach This plan included public outreach through community and stakeholder workshops, as well as committee meetings. The City held an open public workshop in August 2015 to gain insight on how Bremerton citizens would like to prioritize transportation for the next 20 years. The consultant team met frequently with City staff members and stakeholders throughout the course of the planning effort. Regional Coordination * KksmpTrmnsk * Naval Base Khsmp(NBK) • City of Bremerton ADA Representatives • Bremerton School District • West Sound Cycling Club The City also routinely coordinates with the appropriate jurisdictions and agencies on planning and engineering projects. Technical Appendix As all chapters of this Plan, the technical appendix that can be found in Chapter 8, that has further information to support the Vision, Goals and Polices (subsequent section). The technical appendix for the transportation includes the following: • Conditions and Trends: Describes conditions for all travel modes in the existing transportation system. Also identifies current challenges and trends that will affect Bremerton's transportation network in the future. • Bremerton Public Outreach Findings: Describes the public outreach process conducted through stakeholder and community workshops, as well as the specific feedback received from community • Future Transportation Vision: Introduces a layered network concept that forms the foundation of this plan to accommodate all modes of travel and create a complete transportation network in Bremerton. This section also details how to accommodate each travel mode and establishes the City's level of service standards. • Capital Plan: Provides the long-range project lists based on the community values expressed in the transportation goals and layered network. • Implementing the Transportation Element: Evaluates Bremerton's financial conditions over the next 20 years and provides guidance on plan implementation. Vision Bremertonstrives to promote, manage, ,, and maintain a s0; eefficient, and integrated 'ulti- do° rmans r to syste o Support a healthy and vibrant o° community. Goals & Policies The following goals and policies form the foundation of Bremerton's transportation strategy for the future. These goals and policies are to support the overall transportation vision stated above. Transportation Goals :Z. Prornote arra develop fror°usportat orr systerns that st rrrrrlote, support, arra erffiarxe the rnovernerr f of people arra goods to er)sure o prosperous ecor°rr iny. the eKiSti built errrr rmorrrrrern arra rrro rrfo T2. �° �°:��� � ��" r), preserve, ar)d exferr e, arrautility o pr or rrrrestrr° e rrf the �r) fror°u°prfior) systerns ar)d selvices. Tam Providefor arra irnprove the r arra security o.f frorusportat orr users arra the fror)sportat orr syste rn. . krrfrorxe, rmerrrer °orr' ° quality of li,, through tror)s or at orr irwestrnerns that promote, errergycorrservat or), errolthycornrnur)itiesr ae,sthefirs° arrapr.otect the, e rrrr rornne rr f 5m ror)thwouslyirnprove the quality, e°.&ct rrrrrres, or°rde^ffir°irrrrr° .' the fror)sportat orr syste rn. Transportation Policies oMl'TL Piroirnate aind d evellloll 'trr; Ins our°tatiOin systeiirnsthatstiiirndlate, suppoirt, ain inhaurmce th urnov urnein : of peop1le aind goodsto einsuire a pirospeirous ecoinoirny. Implementing Policies for Goal T1: TR1(A): Support and participate in cooperative regional transportation planning processes to ensure consistency and connectivity throughout the region. TR1(B): Coordinate with WSDOT, Kitsap County, and other stakeholders to ensure state facility improvements meet the goals of Bremerton and Comprehensive Plan, and minimize negative impacts to the local transportation system. TR1(C): Promote the continuation of passenger only ferry service and support research and development in new ferry (including fast ferry) technology. TR1(D): Develop a transportation system that will maintain a LOSE or better (V/C less than or equal to 1.0) throughout the City; except along SR 310 (Kitsap Way), which is a Highway of Statewide Significance. Discussion: Develop and maintain a Layered Network that provides connectivity and recognizes that not all streets provide the same quality of travel experience. Classify streets as Freeway, Major/Principal Arterial, Minor Arterial, Major/Principal Collector, Minor Collector, or Local Street. Ensure that the Layered Network continues to provide for all varieties of street uses including regional mobility and cross-town trips, commuting, shopping, and recreational travel, property and business access, and parking, regardless of mode. Also, consider adopting a layered network facility completeness measure as described in the following pedestrian, bicycling, and transit priority areas level of service tables. Pedestrian Priority Area Level of Service (LOS) PRIORITYWITHIN PEDESTRIAN •• Sidewalk provided on both sides of the road* Sidewalk or wide shoulder provided on one side of the road No pedestrian facility provided Bicycle Priority Area Level of Service (LOS) Transit Priority Corridor Level of Service (LOS) ._► •• _T1 More than 80% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions More than 60% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions Less than 60% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions TR1(E): Incorporate the needs of business and commercial traffic flow in the development of transportation improvements that affect commercial and industrial Centers. PRIORITYWITHIN BICYCLE •• Provides minimum treatment* recommendation, as shown within 10 the Bicycle Priority Network Provides a lower -level facility than recommend in the Bicycle Priority Network 10 No bicycle facility or signage Transit Priority Corridor Level of Service (LOS) ._► •• _T1 More than 80% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions More than 60% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions Less than 60% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions TR1(E): Incorporate the needs of business and commercial traffic flow in the development of transportation improvements that affect commercial and industrial Centers. TR1(F): Implement concurrency requirements to ensure adopted Level of Service standards are maintained when new development and re -development occurs. • Require the concurrency system to evaluate the impact on LOS during the development permitting process; • Ensure that development permits are not issued unless and/or until maintenance of adopted LOS standards are assured; and, • Evaluate the feasibility of plan -based concurrency program to simplify development review procedures and enhance the attractiveness for developing in Bremerton TR1(G): Maintain and improve connectivity to link centers to neighborhoods and to the arterials. Work with transportation providers to develop a public transportation system that allows convenient and efficient travel between Centers and ensuring that designated Centers are walkable, and encourage connectivity. TR1(H): Inventory and assess parking capacity needs in the Downtown area. • Work with the United States Navy, Washington State Ferries, the City of Bremerton, and other major employers in the Downtown Core to address parking demands and their impacts on urban development. • Encourage major employers to address and plan for increased parking demands. Encourage efforts to address increased parking demands through parking structures, transportation facilities, and other multi -modal solutions rather than promoting or expanding surface parking. • Acknowledge the negative impacts surface parking has on urban renewal, economic growth, and the environment, and avoid increased surface parking. TR1(1): Encourage transportation improvements that take advantage of Bremerton's waterfront, by providing pedestrian and bicycle paths near the waterfront and encouraging development of urban boating opportunities including non -motorized craft such as kayaks. Identify, and clearly post, public beach access. TR1(J): Support movement of freight by establishing and identifying clear signage, truck, hazardous material transport, and oversized load routes. TR1(K): Identify corridors for development of future mass transit options such as bus rapid transit, etc. TR1(L): Expand opportunities for public involvement in the identification, design, and implementation of transportation related improvements within Bremerton. TR1(M): Recognize and accommodate the special transportation needs of the elderly, children, and persons with disabilities in all aspects of transportation planning, programming, and implementation. Satisfy the community's desire for a high level of accommodation for persons with disabilities using appropriate design standards. TR1(N): Support the transportation needs of traditionally underserved neighborhoods and vulnerable populations, through investment in equitable modes of transportation and equal spending throughout the City, in addition to potential catch-up investment for areas in need as necessary. TR1(0): Identify stable and predictable funding sources for maintaining and preserving existing transportation facilities and services. TR1(P): Leverage state and federal funds for transportation improvements. M " .t':Icin oWI edge th e exis'ding lb uillht einviiiroiniirneint aind irnaiintaiin, pireseirve, ain exteindthe Ifff aind gut lllity of Il ur�i ur uiinves urneint uiurm 'tur'aiirm ll ur"ta'tui urm systeiirns aind services. Implementing Policies for Goal T2: TR2(A): Require new development and redevelopment to incorporate transit, pedestrian, and non - motorized transportation measures during the development review process, including measures such as: • Providing bus and transportation shelters and/or pullouts; • Providing adequate sidewalks, pathways and crosswalks for access by all persons; • Minimizing walking distance between buildings, streets, sidewalks, and transit stops; • Extending the connectivity of the pedestrian, bicycle, and grid street system; • Minimizing auto -dominance on streets by working towards further developing complete streets with multi -modal functions; • Incorporating open space, and/or green space in streetscapes to enhance the pedestrian environment. TR2(8): Enhance and maintain the functionality of the local circulation system by: • Developing and utilizing clear and uniform wayfinding signage to guide traffic throughout the City; • Encouraging bus pull-out lanes in convenient and appropriate locations; TR2(C): Support the existing transportation grid system to promote a quality system to connect the commercial and industrial centers. TR2(D): Incorporate appropriate street lighting as it relates to the land uses (i.e., residential, industrial, commercial use). M " . Pirovidefoir aind iiirnpirovethe safetyaind secuirity,f ,tur,aiirm ur"ta,tui urm useirs ain :Ilh:ur'aiiisll ur"ta'tui urm systeirn. Implementing Policies for Goal T3: TR3(A): Ensure transportation system safety for users and the transportation system through maintenance of infrastructure, and incorporation of safety enhancements, in transportation improvement projects. TR3(B): Maximize the functionality and safety of the local circulation system. • Control the location and spacing of commercial driveways and the design of parking lots to avoid traffic and pedestrian accidents, confusing circulation patterns, and line -of -sight obstructions. TR3(C): Further develop the Complete Streets ordinance, with a context -sensitive design focus to ensure improvements fit the community in which they are located, to better be utilized within the City. TR3(D): Provide a transportation system that effectively serves the needs of and encourages safe pedestrian, bicycle and other non -motorized travel by implementing the policies of City of Bremerton's Non -Motorized Transportation Plan. TR3(E): Encourage the use of public transit by bicyclists and pedestrians by: • Providing safe, attractive, and comfortable walkways and waiting facilities at public transit loading areas; • Providing bicycle storage at transit facilities including bus stops; • Installing bicycle racks on buses, and • Developing and distributing information concerning local and regional non -motorized routes. TR3(F): Reflect the urban nature of roadways within Bremerton by encouraging, where appropriate: • Street trees and landscaping; • Traffic calming strategies and devices; • On -street public parking; • Appropriately scaled and consistent street lighting; • Frequent and appropriate accommodations for transit stops; • Regularly spaced and ADA compliant crosswalks and sidewalks. TR3(G): Minimize the impacts of traffic on residential neighborhoods by discouraging the use of local access streets by non -local traffic. TR3(H): Restor%reate unique neighborhoods via formation of distinctive streetscapes and traffic controlling devices. TR3(1): Reduce speed on neighborhood streets through the use of street design devices such as curb bulbouts, "median obstacles," or other measures proven to be safe and effective at reducing travel speeds. Encourage use of bioretention in curb bulb outs, traffic circles, and other traffic calming measures. Traffic calming measures should include minimizing neighborhood street widths and pedestrian crossing distances to promote a sense of safety for pedestrian crossings. TR3(J): Identify transportation programs and strategies for security and emergency responses. M� 'T4. Einhaince Bireiirneirtoin'suMft f lur :hur'ugh:ur'aiirm ur"ta'tui urm iinvesurneints that piroiirnote eineirgycoinseirvatioin, lheMthy coiirTurnuinities, aesthetics aind l urta th urm Gur iniirnein :v Implementing Policies for Goal T4: TR4(A): Minimize impacts of road construction on environmentally sensitive areas; minimize damaging storm water runoff and pollution from road use and maintenance. • Implement programs that encourage the planting of low -maintenance, vegetated groundcover and trees (where space is adequate) along roadways. • Where possible the City shall require the use and maintenance of Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs) (bioretention, permeable pavement, etc.). TR4(B): Encourage City vehicles to utilize sustainable fuel and reduce emissions/air pollution. TR4(C): Where possible, the City shall require the under -grounding of overhead utilities and encourage utility placement under the paved section of the ROW to reduce potential conflicts with LID BMPs. TR4(D): Require street beautification including landscaping and Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs) along the edge of and within parking areas to reduce visual impact and aid in filtration of runoff. Emphasize use of drought tolerant native vegetation in bioretention facilities and planter strips. TR4(E): Reduce reliance on drive alone trips by prioritizing and implementing supportive local -level transit, high occupancy vehicle (HOV), and nonmotorized improvements. TR4(F): Enhance mobility using the existing footprint of the roadway and technological advancements. When widening roadways, impacts to non -motorized users and transit vehicles and passengers should be minimized. TR4(G): Facilitate safe school walking routes, and, where possible, make capital budget decisions that support such a system. TR4(H): Assure cost-effective maintenance of transportation facilities under the City's jurisdiction, including nonmotorized facilities. TR4(I): Develop clean transportation programs and facilities, including actions to reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from transportation. TR4(J): Incorporate environmental factors into transportation decision-making, including attention to human health and safety. TR4(K): Develop actions for transportation system robustness including adaptation strategies to the effects of climate change. TR4(L): Incorporate environmental factors into transportation decision-making, including attention to human health and safety. TR4(M): Develop clean transportation programs and facilities, including actions to reduce pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from transportation. TR4(N): Providing adequate sidewalks, pathways and crosswalks for access by all persons; TR4(0): Minimizing walking distance between buildings, streets, sidewalks, and transit stops; TR4(P): Extending the connectivity of the pedestrian, bicycle, and grid street system; Goal" 5. Cointiinuous1ly iiirnpirovethe quMfty, effectiveiness, aind efficieincy of the Implementing Policies for Goal T5: TR5(A): Work with Kitsap County, WSDOT, regional transportation agencies, and transportation providers to plan, fund, and implement joint transportation projects and programs. TR5(B): Coordinate plans and development with the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)'s Transportation 2040 and Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies for regional consistency. TR5(C): Support improvements on state highways to reduce congestion, and improve safety and access for through traffic, local traffic, non -motorized and transit users. TR5(D): Work with WSDOT to develop solutions for the access to and from Bremerton with focus on the Gorst interchange. TR5(E): Coordinate with Washington State Ferries and other possible service providers to operate ferry services to Bremerton that meet local service and commuter needs, coordinate with all travel modes, and provide regional service. TR5(F): Support and promote ferry system programs, which maximize the convenience of non -motorized connections, and high -occupancy vehicle (HOV) use, by providing priority status and discouraging single occupancy vehicle use on ferries. TR5(G): Work with Washington State Ferries and Kitsap Transit to coordinate transit schedules of multiple modes of transportation, and to further transportation conveniences including multi -modal options. TR5(H): Work with Washington State Ferries, Naval Base Kitsap and Puget Sound Naval Shipyard to coordinate schedules to reduce congestion from worker releases and the releasing of ferry commuters. TR5(1): Encourage transportation agencies, especially public transit, to operate and maintain local/regional services and facilities that reduce the need for single -occupant vehicles and support the needs of transit -dependent users. Support efforts to expand usage and infrastructure for mass transportation. TR5(J): Work with Kitsap Transit to establish and designate convenient park and ride locations. Incentives could include giving priorities to establishing park and ride in existing parking lots, and forming partnerships with community organizations along easily accessible arterials that have dormant parking during traditional commuting hours (i.e., churches). TR5(K): Reduce auto dependency, especially drive -alone trips, by employing and promoting the application of programs enhance mobility and assist in achievement of the land use vision. This includes: • Develop Travel Demand Management (TDM) strategies to minimize the need for additional transportation infrastructure and expenditures. • Continue to coordinate with local employers, including the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, to implement commute trip reduction plans and programs and stagger release where feasible. TR5(L): Provide a prioritize list of transportation projects that supports the Comprehensive Plan vision. That prioritized list should consider projects that support the regional Downtown Center and Puget Sound Industrial Center -Bremerton and the City's Centers Concept, or approved by a functional plan. CityServices Introduction........................................................................................................................CS-4 Vision........................................................................................................................................................ CS -5 Goals& Policies........................................................................................................................................CS-5 CityServices Goals...................................................................................................................................CS-5 CityServices Policies................................................................................................................................CS-6 Implementing Policies for Goal CSI: ................................................................................................ CS -6 Implementing Policies for Goal CS2:................................................................................................CS-7 Implementing Policies for Goal CS3:................................................................................................CS-7 Implementing Policies for Goal CS4:................................................................................................CS-9 City Services Introduction The City Services Element addresses services that are essential to a community and its ability to grow. These services are crucial to the health, safety, and welfare of community members. This Element guides how the provision of services, such as water, sewer, parks, and schools support the future growth and development of Bremerton. This City Services Element combines the function of two plan elements required under the Growth Management Act: The Utilities Element and the Capital Facilities Element. The following section includes the goals and policies for the City of Bremerton City Services. The City Service Appendix includes the technical foundation for the City Services Chapter, including city services inventory, existing and targeted Level of Service standards, funding sources, and the Capital Facility Plan. Please note that though this Chapter focuses on administrating public facilities to Bremerton's citizens, other portions of the Comprehensive Plan also address public facilities that should be considered in conjunction with this chapter. Such as: when reviewing this chapter for planning of public facilities like street improvements, the Transportation Element should also be considered. Vision The community When d Where e i is needed. Goals & Policies The following goals and policies form the foundation of Bremerton's city services strategy for the future for City and public utilities and facilities. These goals and policies are to support the overall city service vision stated above. City Services Goals C5.�1. Provide rnur)idpal services that er ffi r°xe the qualify ofl , r) i�vrnertor). C53. Provide adequate, capitalfucilities that: • Achieve acceptable levels o,,f service; • Meet I. , l °f c tirnefirms. C,54. Provide sqft, r)d iviiable utilityservice, to cines )s° i4thile talar°xir)g ecor)o n City Services Policies GoMI 1. Provide urn uinicilpMiricthat einhaincethe quMftyf Iffe uiin Bireiirneirtoin. Implementing Policies for Goal CS1: CS1(A): Improve accessibility to City Services including implementing new technology to provide information and services more conveniently. CS1(B): Educate the citizenry about City services and citizen responsibilities. CS1(C): Provide meaningful opportunities for community involvement. Provide regular volunteer opportunities to the general public and enlist residents for their talents (work to identify specific community assets and invite identified groups and citizens) to participate in governance. CS1(D): Provide public facilities and services conveniently and equitably throughout the community and ensure that the prescribed Level of Service standards are pursued. CS1(E): Provide safe and well-maintained street infrastructure throughout the City. CS1(F): Improve and maintain sidewalks through the City with an emphasis on accessibility. CS1(G): Provide a wide range of recreational opportunities for people of all ages. CS1(H): Promote open spaces and "green spaces" for everyone's enjoyment and recognize recreational needs in open space planning. Encourage the installation of Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs) in open spaces, including bioretention facilities and permeable pavement. Include public education elements in LID BMPs in open spaces. Encourage the installation of Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs) in open spaces, including bioretention facilities and permeable pavement. Include public education elements in LID BMPs in open spaces. CS1(1): Provide trash receptacles and waste conveniences in public places, especially in City parks and encourage citizen responsibility regarding proper waste disposal, including pet waste disposal. CS1(J): Continue coordination with the school district, recognizing that schools provide a unifying social and physical amenity that is a key focus for successful neighborhoods. CS1(K):Work actively through public and private partnerships to develop and implement a viable urban forestry management plan. CS1(L): Facilitate public and private beautification efforts, especially on City properties and public rights- of-way. • Provide adequate maintenance of public landscaping. • Use trees and plants that are well-suited for an urban environment. Ml CS2. Eincouiragethe safety aind h 4lhflh of iresideints aind visitors. Implementing Policies for Goal CS2: CS2(A): Prepare emergency preparedness plans including instruction for public staff and for citizens regarding services and support locations available immediately following an incident. CS2(8): Work actively to reduce crime and work through civic partnerships to address the plague of substance abuse and addiction. CS2(C): Provide community gathering points within neighborhoods, supported by Programming like City Parks and Recreation and crime prevention education. CS2(D): Improve citizen safety after dusk by enhancing lighting for pedestrians, especially around and leading to places of activity. CS2(E): Collaborate with citizens, public organizations, and non-profit agencies towards a proactive approach to social needs. CS2(F): Encourage social services that meet needs of a diverse population and develop appropriate criteria for locating social service facilities. CS2(G): Demonstrate awareness and consideration for special -needs populations. Ml CS3. Provide adequate ca: 1p'tall facili'ti ,th a,t: addiress deficieinciesaind ain'tuicill at gur wth needs; achieve accqjptabIle ll v 111 �fservice; ruse fui t':Muresouirces efficieintly; ain urneet ur'allui :uic'tiurmm llluiurm v Discussion: Capital facilities include all services provided, planned for, paid for, and delivered by the City including water systems, sanitary sewer systems, stormwater facilities, streets, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection facilities. Implementing Policies for Goal CS3: CS3(A): Apply growth strategies to fiscal investment decisions to expand service areas or infrastructure capacities. CS3(8): Provide a public process for monitoring, review, and planning of all City services and facilities, including municipal facilities, parks, streets, community meeting places and buildings. CS3(C): Monitor the expenditure of capital resources, ensuring the prescribed level of service for the following services and facilities: potable water, sanitary sewer, stormwater management, street maintenance, law enforcement, fire protection, emergency medical service, transportation, solid waste, and parks. CS3(D): Maintain, rehabilitate or reuse existing facilities wherever feasible and still meet the capital needs of the population. CS3(E): Establish adequate funding for public facilities and services for existing development and new growth including pursuing alternative and creative funding mechanisms for public services and facilities. CS3(F): Establish adequate funding for infrastructure critical to the health, well-being, and economic development of the City. CS3(G): Establish priorities for funding that are specified in the prescribed Level of Service standards. • Review capital projects as part of the City's budget process, (1) to ensure an ongoing review of capital needs, and (2) so that capital and operating budgets can be considered together. CS3(H): Manage a comprehensive maintenance program and consider future maintenance and repair costs of new capital items when making selection and expenditure decisions on new capital facilities. CS3(1): Apply cost-effectiveness criteria to capital investments. CS3(J): Work with the development community to provide adequate infrastructure, such as roads, sewer, water, and stormwater for new growth. Explore options for a strategic impact fee program or other funding sources. CS3(K): Improve sidewalks throughout the City with an emphasis on accessibility. CS3(L): Provide street infrastructure that is well maintained, has sufficient capacity, meets all compliance requirements for accessibility. • Identify dedicated revenue to adequately maintain the existing investment in street infrastructure; • Develop revenue sources to allow full implementation of the Capital Improvement Plan. Consider new revenue such as transportation impact fees, or re -direct existing revenue; and • Eliminate barriers to accessibility with sidewalks and city facilities. Prioritize implementation using citizen groups and focus improvements in the areas with the most use. CS3(M): Participate in the planning of the Urban Growth Areas (UGA). Achieve coordinated planning for the City's urban growth areas with Kitsap County (including the Countywide Planning Policies), other jurisdictions and service providers, especially for the provision of capital facilities and services. • Work towards development standards within the UGA that are uniform or complimentary to the City's development standards.- 0 tandards; • Safeguard urban level of service within the UGA which are comparable to the levels set within the City; • Identify development concerns within the UGA and inventory challenges to address; and • Ensure quality residential development in the UGA that has both urban and strictly residential qualities, including walkability. CS3(N): Adopt Level of Service (LOS) standards for public facilities, reflecting community preferences for quality of service delivery. Additionally consider adopting LOS standards that support and encourage the development of Centers. CS3(0): Adopt a Concurrency Management Ordinance (requiring capital facilities meet adopted Level of Service standards at the same time with development) in order to maintain the community's identified desired level of service. CS3(P): Adopt six year capital facilities programs (CIPS), including Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPS) on an annual basis to demonstrate funding capability that supports the land use patterns and other goals and policies adopted within this Plan. CS3(Q): Ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan are coordinated and consistent for the 6 and 20 -year planning period. If adequate facilities are currently unavailable and public funds are not committed to provide such facilities, developers must provide such facilities at their own expense in order to develop, or the City may consider other funding sources. If the probable funding falls short of meeting the capital facility needs of the anticipated future land uses and population, the type and extent of land uses planned for the City must be reassessed. CoMl CS4. Provide of aind irdliab1leut lllity irvuic 'to citizein , WhHe Ill Mlaurmciing coinourmmuic, aesthetics is aind eiiriviiir'oiiriiirTieiirl'talll'fac'toiir's. Discussion: Utilities include all services provided, planned for, paid for, and delivered by providers other than the jurisdiction (such as electrical, telecommunication, natural gas, ports, and libraries). Implementing Policies for Goal CS4: CS4(A): Encourage utility providers to co -locate for aesthetics and efficiency and prioritize utility placement under the paved section of the right-of-way where there are fewer conflicts with installations of roadside Low Impact Development (LID) Best Management Practices (BMPs). CS4(B): Develop an under -grounding ordinance and encourage Local Improvement Districts, to install utilities underground, and in the paved section of the existing right-of-way, when appropriate. CS4(C): Create standards and processes for locating wireless telecommunications facilities that assure adequate services while protecting neighborhoods and other portions of the City from negative impacts. • Provide incentives for co -location as an alternative to building new towers; and • Provide adequate setbacks, buffers, and camouflaging requirements to assure attractive installations, protection of adjacent land uses and residential neighborhoods. Encourage the use of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs) within setbacks and buffers where appropriate. Environment Introduction......................................................................................................................... E-4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions....................................................................................................................E-4 Vision.......................................................................................................................................................... E-5 Goals& Policies.......................................................................................................................................... E-5 EnvironmentalGoals.............................................................................................................................. E-5 EnvironmentalPolicies........................................................................................................................... E-6 Implementing Policies for Goal E1— Stewardship: Planning............................................................. E-6 Implementing Policies for Goal E1— Stewardship: Development..................................................... E-7 Implementing Policies for Goal E1— Stewardship: Education........................................................... E-7 Implementing Policies for Goal E2: .................................................................................................... E-8 Implementing Policies for Goal E3: .................................................................................................... E-9 Implementing Policies for Goal E4: .................................................................................................. E-10 Environment Introduction Bremerton has a vital interest in preserving its natural beauty and ensuring long-term environmental health. With vast marine shorelines, freshwater lakes, coastal bluffs, wetlands, a preserved watershed area, and scenic views of two mountain ranges, Bremerton is part of a complex ecosystem and provides a stunning natural setting for its residents and visitors. This natural setting is one of the most important amenities to Bremerton residents and visitors alike. While it is expected that Bremerton will increase in population over the next 20 years, it is imperative that the environmental resources be protected and, where possible, enhanced. Sustainability is a concept that addresses the problems and needs of the present, without compromising the needs of the future. In spirit, sustainability protects and adds natural beauty and function with growth. This Element provides a vision and commitment by the City of Bremerton to bring a sustainable approach to land use management. This element of the Plan contains broad environmental goals and policies. Some of the Plan's other elements also include goals and policies addressing how environmental values specifically relate to the topics of those elements. For instance, the Land Use Element includes goals and policies governing development near environmental critical areas, and the Transportation Element addresses possible environmental impacts and improvements associated with transportation choices. Greenhouse Gas Emissions PSRC's Vision 2040 stresses the need for agencies at all levels of government to seek ways to both mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change. This includes: Efforts to maximize energy efficiency, increase renewable energy, reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, decrease vehicle miles traveled, improve the convenience and safety of multimodal transportation, protect the natural landscape and vegetation, and increase recycling and reduce waste.' In an efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for the anticipated impacts of climate change, PSRC has developed a set of reporting tools to assist countywide planning groups, local jurisdictions, and transit agencies as they work on climate change related updates and amendments to their policies and plans. These tools are designed to highlight key provisions that should be addressed as policy and plan updates. In regards to greenhouse gases, PSRC requires the following provisions: • Policies and implementation actions to address federal and state clean air laws and the reduction of pollutants including GHGs. Incorporate the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency's adopted growth management policies into the Comprehensive Plan. • Include specific provisions to reduce GHG emissions; include provisions addressing adaptation to the effects of climate change.Z • Develop clean transportation programs and facilities, including actions to reduce pollution and GHG emissions from transportation. In the following section, policies related to greenhouse gas emission and climate change have been included.' PSRC, Vision 2040 While both the Governor and the Legislature have set targets to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2035, and 50 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, no specific targets are required by cities at this time. 3 PSRC Planning Requirements and Guidance. http://www.psrc.org/assets/4535/Comp Plan Reporting Tool.pdf?processed=true Vision Protect Bremerton's natural environment by meetingthe needs of " citizens Without compromising the needs offuture generations. Goals & Policies The following goals and policies form the foundation of Bremerton's strategy for the future for working for and with the environment. These goals and policies are to support the overall environmental vision stated above. Environmental Goals E.I. fei4tar °hip: Provide stei4tard-shipcrni^gym to ra policies r) the rnarornner)t, to cor)du t rift' operatiorn r) a mann r that protects the rwir rnner)t, ar)d to rov cf r) r) hot4i the rift', its bush , ar)d msid6n.5 call') rnpro e the qualify o,f the rwit- rn°nern. Elm rth: Preserve r)d erffiar e vegef f r) r)d earth msources. E4. Air: Finure cornpliarxe, %4tith good,ftderal, state, regiorml, ar)d local air quality starWards through coordir f , , lor) -f rrn °fr f � that i °° the rnar)y cornributors to ail. ll f r)m Environmental Policies M� El.: Stewardship: Provide tairdshuil by coinsideiriing l urmg irainge uiurnpl licatioins of City Ip6ll ui c i oin'the eiiriviiir'oiiriiirTieiiri't,'tocoin Duct City opeiratioinsui in a urnain irm ur t heat Ipir� tect the in iur iniirneint, aindto l ur� v i ut':ati in Duan 1howthe City,us:s busiinesses, ain iresideints t'ain iurnpir the uMlfty of :hin iur iniirnein :v Implementing Policies for Goal E1— Stewardship: Planning E1(A): Promote waste reduction and recycling measures throughout the community. Ensure that waste disposal occurs in an environmentally safe, efficient manner. E1(B): Reduce the amount of waste disposed in landfills by reducing the amount of waste generated and promoting recycling and reusing materials. • Provide attractive, well-maintained recycling bins and garbage receptacles in public spaces that separate different types of waste. • Ensure that all City departments practice recycling and attempt to reduce waste. E1(C): Maintain and support City sponsored public events for yard waste collection. E1(D): Use the brownfields approach and grants to identify and restore potentially environmentally degraded property. E1(E): Encourage environmentally sensitive businesses and practices. • Explore options to provide incentives to companies and facilities locating in Bremerton, and recognize existing facilities and companies that opt to use green building techniques or low impact development beyond what is required. E1(F): Promote use of alternative energy. E1(G): Support and explore the multijurisdictional efforts to reduce greenhouse gases, address climate change, sea -level rise, ocean acidification, and other impacts of changing of global conditions. E1(H): Maintain good federal, state, regional, and local air quality standards through coordinated, long- term strategies that address the many contributors to air pollution. El(l): Reduce the amount of airborne particulates through a street sweeping program, dust abatement on construction sites, covered loads of hauled materials, and other methods to reduce dust sources E1(J): Coordinate planning of critical area and habitat with Kitsap County, Suquamish Tribe, and other local agencies. Implementing Policies for Goal E1— Stewardship: Development E1(K): Ensure code flexibility to enable and encourage environmentally sensitive development and use of Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs) where feasible. E1(L): Use Best Available Science to preserve and enhance the functions and values of critical area through policies, regulations, programs and incentives. E1(M): Utilize, where feasible, Best Management Practices (BMPs) and Low Impact Development (LID) technology in City projects and practices to achieve effective environmental stewardship. E1(N):Encourage the use of sustainable building methods and materials (such as those specified under certification like LEED, Built Green, Salmon Safe, and Living Building Challenge) that may reduce impacts on the built and natural environment. E1(0): Support the continued planting of Bremerton's urban forest, a diverse mix of native and non- native trees, shrubs and groundcovers, which line our streets and shade and beautify our homes, businesses, parks and natural areas. E1(P): Reduce solid waste generation through salvage and reuse of building materials, including architecturally and historically significant materials. E1(Q): Advocate for expansion of transit and encourage car -sharing, cycling and walking, to limit or reduce vehicle trips as a strategies for reducing vehicle -related air pollution. Implementing Policies for Goal E1— Stewardship: Education E1(R): Promote community awareness, responsibility, and participation in sustainability efforts through public outreach programs and other opportunities for change. Serve as a catalyst and facilitator for partnership to leverage change in the broader community. E1(S): Encourage environmental stewardship for the care and planting of trees through well -considered outreach and educational materials, along with City incentives. E1(T): Educate citizens about sources of pollution. • Provide information to the public regarding the negative impact to water quality from the use of pesticides and herbicides. Encourage a reduction in the use of pesticides and herbicides. MOGS': Earth: Preserve aind einhaince vegtati in aind earth iresouirces. Implementing Policies for Goal E2: E2(A): Preserve environmental quality by taking into account the land's suitability for development, and directing intense development away from critical areas and soils with good infiltration potential for stormwater management. E2(8): Encourage conservation of critical areas and nonrenewable resources. E2(C): Ensure that development review includes evaluating potential negative impacts on habitat and avoids impacts, including off-site impacts. For those circumstances where avoidance is not possible and if mitigation is determined to be necessary, a detailed description should be considered related to what efforts were taken to avoid impact to the extent possible. E2(D): Preserve the integrity of riparian corridors and steep slopes through the preservation of native plants and the replacement of invasive, non-native plants with native and drought tolerant plants. E2(E): Preserve and enhance trees, native vegetation, and integrate suitable native plants in urban landscape development. E2(F): Maintain and improve the City's tree canopy. Consider proper vegetation selection, taking into consideration potential conflicts, such as sidewalks and overhead utilities. E2(G): During development review strive to preserve existing healthy and safe trees on private, commercial, and public property. E2(H):Adopt lighting standards to prevent light pollution. E2(1): Manage the City Utility Lands for multiple purposes including protecting water processes and forest habitat. E2(1): Limit clearing, grading and soil disturbance outside of the building footprint or newly developed residential and commercial sites, especially those sites with sensitive features. Reduce compaction and restore infiltration capacity on already cleared sites whenever feasible. MEl at r: Protect wateir iresouircesfoir Ipir� in't aindfutuire geineiratioins. Implementing Policies for Goal E3: E3(A): Preserve and protect fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas through regulation, acquisitions, incentives, and other techniques, including considering regional initiatives such as the Chico Creek basin project and other salmon recovery plans. E3(B): Preserve and protect natural surface water storage sites, such as wetlands, aquifers, streams, and water bodies as these are critical features that regulate surface flows and recharge groundwater. E3(C): Participate in regional species protection efforts, including salmon habitat enhancement and restoration. Identify, prioritize, and eliminate physical barriers and other impediments to anadromous fish spawning and rearing habitat. E3(D): Manage aquatic and riparian habitats to preserve and enhance their natural functions and processes, which provide fish and wildlife habitat and protect water quality. E3(E): Conserve and protect groundwater resources, headwater wetlands and priority habitat areas. E3(F): Promote alternatives to traditional storm water practices for new construction and require onsite stormwater management using Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and Best Management Practices (BMPs) where feasible. E3(G): Conserve and protect groundwater resources. • Provide for well -head protection where appropriate. • Protect aquifer recharge areas, especially those used to provide public water supplies. Coordinate measures to protect groundwater resources by using watershed plans and planning efforts. E3(H): Apply Bremerton's Shoreline Master Program goals and policies to development and redevelopment within the shoreline jurisdiction. E3(1): Encourage restoration of degraded shoreline areas in coordination with shoreline redevelopment and the City's voluntary shoreline restoration. E3(J): Coordinate with Kitsap Public Health District to abate environmental pollution from failing septic systems within City limits. E3(K): Incorporate findings and science from joint watershed planning efforts. E3(L): Educate the public on best management practices regarding use of pesticides and fertilizers to prevent run-off of chemicals and pollution of water bodies. M� El.:Air: Ensure coiirnpl l iaincwith good 'fed eira1, state, uregi ur4l, aind l t':Mahr, quAfty staindairdsthirough coordiinated,Ill ing tururn stirategiesthat addiressthe irnainy colintilributolirsto aiur, jP61Hlutiolin. Implementing Policies for Goal E4: E4(A): Maintain high air quality through land use and transportation planning and management. E4(B): Advocate for expansion of transit and encourage car -sharing, cycling and walking, to limit or reduce vehicle trips as a strategies for reducing vehicle -related air pollution. E4(C): Continue the city's commute trip reduction (CTR) program and work with Bremerton's employers to encourage their participation in CTR. E4(D): Reduce the amount of airborne particulates through a street sweeping program, dust abatement on construction sites, covered loads of hauled materials, and other methods to reduce dust sources. E4(E): Support and explore the multijurisdictional efforts to reduce greenhouse gases, address climate change, sea -level rise, ocean acidification, and other impacts of changing of global conditions. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan Technical Appendices LAND USE APPENDIX HOUSING APPENDIX ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT APPENDIX TRANSPORTATION APPENDIX CITY SERVICES APPENDIX ENVIRONMENT APPENDIX PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM LIST OF ADOPTED PLANS City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan 2 Technical Appendices fla CurrentConditions................................................................................................................. LU Appendix -2 Current Land Use: 2015...................................................................................................... LU Appendix -2 2014 Buildable Lands Summary.............................................................................................. LU Appendix -2 Development Constraints................................................................................................... LU Appendix -3 Existing Development Patterns: .............................................................................................. LU Appendix -4 Market and Competitive Factors: ........................................................................................... LU Appendix -4 Socio -Economic Considerations.......................................................................................... LU Appendix -5 Health and the Built Environment...................................................................................... LU Appendix -5 Projected Land Use Conditions............................................................................................. LU Appendix -16 Summary of Population and Employment Projections..................................................... LU Appendix -16 LandDemand........................................................................................................................ LU Appendix -16 Calculation of Future Residential Land Need........................................................................ LU Appendix -16 Calculation of Future Commercial Land Need...................................................................... LU Appendix -19 Calculation of Future Industrial Land Need.......................................................................... LU Appendix -20 Summary of Additional Land Need................................................................................... LU Appendix -21 LandSupply........................................................................................................................... LU Appendix -22 Residential Land Supply.................................................................................................... LU Appendix -22 Commercial Land Supply.................................................................................................. LU Appendix -23 Industrial Land Supply...................................................................................................... LU Appendix -24 Current Conditions The dimensions and nature of current land uses, including information on vacant land for various uses, existing development constraints, and social and economic factors that exist today, are all factors that must be understood before a community charts it future course. The following subsections provide an overview of these key conditions. Current Land Use: 2015 2014 Buildable Lands Summary The City of Bremerton covers 30 square miles (19,000 acres). There are 5,000 acres in residential designations, 1,000 acres are commercial, 4,000 acres are industrial, and 7,000 acres are public lands. Population at the end of 2012 was 39,650 according to Washington Office of Financial Management (OFM) estimates. Quick calculation reveals that overall residential density is approximately five persons per acre. According to the Buildable Lands Analysis, recent development has been at that density at approximately 5.07 persons per acre (Kitsap County Buildable Lands Report, 2014). It is additionally estimated that there are approximately 225 acres of commercial land that is available in 2012 for future development. It should be noted that significant portions of each category of land is vacant or underutilized. The Buildable Lands Analysis estimated that there were approximately 1,482 net acres of vacant or underutilized residential land in the city in 2012. These lands were designated in both single family and multi -family categories. While estimates of vacant industrial properties are more difficult to develop, it is clear that there are significant vacant industrial lands, at least, within the current City. For example, over 2,500 acres of vacant industrial land is located in the western portions of the City alone (Puget Sound Industrial Center — Bremerton). Development Constraints Environmentally Sensitive Areas Bremerton has adopted a Critical Areas Ordinance that defines, addresses and regulates aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, flood hazard areas, geologically hazardous areas, wetlands, and stream corridors. This ordinance is intended to ensure that the City's remaining critical areas are preserved and protected and that new development in and adjacent to these areas will be carefully managed to avoid further degradation. While viewed as development constraints, these regulations will ultimately enhance new development and reduce long-term problems. The regulations influence will be felt least in the already developed portions of Bremerton. The greatest opportunities for impact will be on larger sites in less -urbanized West Bremerton locations. Even there, development can be planned and adjusted to shift densities away from sensitive areas without losing development potential. Watershed Lands: Bremerton's primary source of water is a carefully managed surface system along the Union River Watershed. Over time the City has acquired approximately 3,100 acres of land to protect that water resource and will continue to strengthen it. These lands are currently planned and zoned for watershed use and not available for other types of development. Utility Owned Lands: Adjacent to the City watershed in southwest Bremerton are approximately 5,000 acres of mostly forested lands owned by the City's Utility. Some of the non -watershed lands are used for recreation (Gold Mountain Golf Course) and some are needed for the composting and disposal of bio -solids from the City's sewage treatment plant. This practice serves the dual purpose of disposing of the waste product while enhancing tree growth and wood production. Shorelines: Bremerton has over 20 miles of lake and marine shoreline, including Kitsap Lake, Dyes and Sinclair Inlets, and the Port Washington Narrows. These are important natural, scenic, aesthetic and recreational resources. Although most shoreline parcels have already been developed, the overall impact of this program on development will be minimal. We do expect additional infill and redevelopment along our shorelines. The provisions of the Shoreline Master Program will help ensure that those activities will enhance with no net loss of environmental functions, rather than damage, our shoreline environment. Steep Slopes and Hillsides: Bremerton has very little flat land. It was built on hilly terrain surrounded by waterways and, in some locations, steep marine bluffs and hillsides. Again, since most of the urban area has already been developed, these constraints are not expected to seriously affect new or infill development. Most areas have street access and utilities and, since the hills and slopes provide excellent and highly desirable view sites, they tend to be considered valuable resources rather than development obstacles. Existing Development Patterns: Existing structures and development patterns maybe the greatest development constraint. Bremerton's housing stock consists of many small older homes (median age of homes in Bremerton are 65 years). Many of the lots are large enough to place an accessory dwelling unit on them, are large enough to further subdivide, or are suitable for redevelopment. However, the presence of existing structures on the potential redevelopment site, or deteriorating structures nearby tends to raise the cost of development, affect financing, and/or reduce the desirability of the site to potential buyers or tenants. Bremerton will continue to support the improvement of the overall condition of structures and properties throughout the City. Market and Competitive Factors: Although Bremerton has a sufficient supply of zoned land area to accommodate the additional residents projected by this Plan, a number of market factors stand in our path. Among the obvious are regional or national economic conditions, availability of financing for new construction and home -ownership, weak "curb appeal" of available sites, availability of business-related financing, strength of the job market, etc. Some constraints are more directly related to the Land Use Element, including: Willingness to Convert: Many of Bremerton's oversized lots and other vacant infill sites are being enjoyed by their owners for yard areas, additional off-street parking or RV storage, to protect views, etc. These yards are valuable and not readily given up by many resident home -owners. However, investors may be more financially -inclined and willing to maximize the development potential of these properties. So, while the City encourages home -ownership, it also encourages property investment, new ideas, infill, redevelopment and neighborhood improvement. The conversion process is slow and favors vacant lots over underutilized lots. Bremerton has many more of the latter. Competition and Development Pressures: Bremerton has an extensive public infrastructure, zoning, an efficient permitting process, development incentives, all the conveniences and services of a central city, and a land use inventory that shows where the development opportunities are. We are in position and ready to grow. There are reasons why Bremerton is not yet growing as intended. The city is surrounded by rapidly growing urban development in unincorporated areas that also have urban services. Kitsap County is one of the fastest growing counties in Washington and development pressures are great. However, development is often easier and less expensive when done on the urban fringe or in rural areas where public sewer and water systems aren't required and road and other standards are considerably lower than in urban areas. Those areas are also more likely to have larger vacant parcels available, less expensive land, and occasionally urban services to further stimulate growth. Socio -Economic Considerations The "profile" presented in the Housing Element of this Comprehensive Plan explains the social and economic diversity that is characteristic of the Bremerton community. This diverse landscape shapes the Land Use Element. Health and the Built Environment Provided by Kitsap Public Health District for consideration for all Land Use decisions. "Healthy community design is about planning and designing communities [in ways that] make it easier for people to live healthy lives. Healthy community design encourages mixed land uses to bring people closer to the places where they live, work, worship, and play. Doing so reduces dependence on cars and provides affordable housing, good bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, space for social gathering, and access to transit, parks, and healthy foods." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Chronic disease is the leading cause of death and disability in Kitsap County and the U.S. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, almost 1 in 2 adults in the U.S. has at least one chronic disease. Approximately 75% of U.S. health care spending is used to treat patients with chronic diseases. Many risk factors, such as not enough physical activity, poor nutrition, and smoking, can lead to risk conditions such as obesity, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure that can result in in chronic diseases like heart disease, stroke, diabetes, etc. Residents of Bremerton need access to healthy food retail, places in which to safely exercise, and ways of getting around and accessing services without their cars. It is critical that we recognize the changes that need to be made to our environments, both natural and man-made, in order to improve the health and wellbeing of our community. This health resource guide focuses on the importance of healthy food access and active living, and the relationship between these attributes and chronic disease prevention. Currently we are seeing an increase in overweight and obese adults, with almost two thirds of Bremerton residents overweight or obese (See Health Figure 1). Furthermore, over 20% of adults get no leisure time activity and over 50% of 12th graders are not achieving the recommended daily physical activity recommendations (See Health Figure 11.). In Bremerton 70 percent of Bremerton adults eat less than the recommended 5 fruits and vegetables per day (See Health Figures III a. and III b.). Additionally, 43 percent of adults in Bremerton have been told by a medical professional that they have high cholesterol (see Health Figure IV.) and 36 percent have been informed that they have high blood pressure. Health Figure I AdUltS INot at a 11 lealthy Weight (Survey methods changed in 201.1., do not compare 1.00% 201.1. and newer to historical) 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% -0 -0 "0 '0 '0 LO 1® -P `L® iti B 11:1 E IM E RTO IN - IKITSAIP W/.\ Health Figure 11 AdUltS With INo 1leiSUre rime Physical Activity (Survey methods changed in 201.1., do not 50% compare 201.1. and newer to historical) 40% 30% 20% I Ilillllpp lull I ggie 1.0% 0% rye) -0 -60"0 -0 i® '0 -P�, i® -61`1®` luuuuuuuuuuu B 11:1 E IM E 111TO IN - IKITSAIP W/.\ 12th Graders INot IIIMeeting Physical Activity Recommendation (60 mins, 5 70% days/week) no Bremerton data 2006, 2008 60% ..... .. .. .. 50% 40% 30% 20% 1.0% 0% 2.006 2008 201.0 201.2 201.4 Bremerton -Kitsajo W/.\ Health Figure III a AdUltS Report 11::.sating 11:::ewer than 5 11::I'UitS and Vegetables 1l wily (Survey methods 1 OMO changed In 201.1., do not compare 201.1. and newer 90% to historical) 80% 70% 60% 50% 2.003 2.005 2.007 2.009 201.1. 201.3 BIREIM EIRTO IN - IKIITSAIP Health Figure III b 8th Graders Report lEating 11::�ewer than 5 11::I'Uits and Vegetables 1lwily INot asked in 201.0; no Bremerton data 2004 201.2; 1.00% no IKitsap or VVA in 2002 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 2002 2004 2.006 2.008 201.2 201.4 B re rn e rt o n - IK i is a Io nuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu W/.\ Health Figure IV AdUltS 11::.:ver bold 11 lIave 11 ligh Cholesterol loy 11 lealthcare If rovider (Survey methods changed 50% in 201.1., do not compare 201.1. and newer to historical) 40% 30% 20% 1.0% 0% 2.003 2.005 2.007 2.009 201.1. 201.3 B 11:1 E IM E RTO IN - KITSAIP W/.\ In this section, the aim is to show the connections between access to healthy food and physical activity and our community's long-term health, and provide correlation between this important topic and the Comprehensive Plan which will create a strong start to helping all residents of Kitsap achieve fuller, healthier lives. Active Living Two main sources of physical activity in our day to day lives are active transportation and active recreation. Active transportation is the use of walking, biking or public transport instead of using a private car or other personal motorized means. Active transportation can be the part of a trip during which one is walking to a bus stop or from a car to a home or office. Active recreation (for our purposes) refers to outdoor recreational activities, such as organized sports, playground activities, or exercise for the purpose of being active and not for the purpose of getting from one place to another. Physical activity is a known determinant of health. It is understood that if an individual participates in physical activity on a regular basis (150 minutes of moderate activity per week for adults and at least 60 minutes daily for children) that it will reduce an individual's risk of respiratory illnesses, cardiovascular conditions, obesity and diabetes. Increasing access to opportunities to be physically active for all residents and incorporating inviting design and accessible facilities has shown to result in more people routinely exercising. By implementing policies in our Comprehensive Plan that promote the improvement of biking and pedestrian facilities, public transportation, proximity to services, and open spaces and parks, we increase the likelihood that physical activity in our communities will increase. An increase in physical activity through active living will improve our community's overall health and ultimately lead to less chronic disease and a more vibrant city. The Impact of Policy on Active Living There are many opportunities within a long term plan to set policy that will support bicycling and walking as potential forms of daily transportation and recreation. Good transportation is vital for access to activities and essential services that are needed to fully participate in our society. In automobile dependent communities those who do not have the ability to drive or have access to autos can be at a great economic and social disadvantage. Many experts note that approximately 30% of all -age populations do not drive for various reasons. Communities without adequate quality and quantity of transportation, including facilities for bicycling and walking, place residents at a distinct disadvantage when trying to access jobs, school, medical services or other daily needs. (ALTA) Within the Land Use and Transportation chapters of this Comprehensive Plan Update, there are implications for health in policies regarding how many people live in certain places, how connected people are, how many services are provided in each unit of land, and the ease with which people can travel from one type of land use (residential) to another (commercial). When addressing land use policies there are a variety of ways in which planning policies impact residents' access to active living, most of which address three main issues; connectivity, mixed use, and density. Connectivity is the extent that roads and streets are connected, allowing for direct travel between them. Mixed use is the ratio of residential and commercial use within a set land unit. For instance, a mall is considered commercial whereas a shop, or row of shops, with apartments above would be considered mixed use. Combining the uses of land helps diminish the distance an individual needs to travel between where they live, work, and access good and services. This type of use makes it more likely that people will walk, bike or use transit options to get where they need to go, supporting a more active and healthier lifestyle. Density is the number of units (families or individuals) living on a portion of land, usually an acre. Density in this Comprehensive Plan is categorized into Low Density Residential (LDR) Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Multifamily Residential (MR). When there are higher densities of people and mixed use of residential and commercial destinations there are often shorter distances to travel, making it more likely that individuals will make trips from one place to another by biking or walking. Furthermore, when there are safe and accessible active transportation options, there is an increase in opportunity for physical activity to be incorporated into someone's regular routine. Transportation has a significant impact on our health and well-being. Most transportation systems in our region do not facilitate or support biking and walking and tend to focus on the movement of vehicles, not people. By increasing residents' opportunities to be physically active while transporting themselves between work, home and daily activities, we provide a platform for an increase in physical activity that decreases the likelihood of chronic disease prevalence in these communities. Access to transit is often associated with active transportation due to the distance between residence, or business and the transit hub. The more an individual takes public transportation the more physically active they are as a result of the need to walk or bike between transit and destination. Additionally, transit provides connections to the broader community and increases the opportunity to access destinations throughout the larger region. When homes, business and other destinations are located near transit, there is less reliance on motorized vehicles for transportation, and a greater opportunity for active transportation modes to be used'. ' Gresham, Appendix 49: Health through the Built Environment. Three main barriers to active transportation are: long distances between origins and destinations, a lack of facilities within relatively easy access, and traffic safety concerns. The ways in which we try to combat these barriers in transportation policy are to ensure that non -motorized access and safety is incorporated into jurisdictions' transportation plans, encourage and support the integration of bike lanes and pedestrian paths in as many areas as possible and to ensure that non -motorized transportation means are accessible to all residents. The presence of parks in close proximity to all residents increases the likelihood of physical activity and good health. Parks, natural areas, and recreation facilities provide individuals and communities with personal, social, economic, and environmental benefits that contribute to a higher quality of life'. Parks provide for physical activity, connections to greenspaces, quiet places for reflection, and an enhanced sense of community derived through public spaces and community events. Parks also provide connections within and between neighborhoods and act as community gathering spaces. Many parks provide community gardening space, providing individuals the opportunity to grow their own food.'. Additionally, studies show that residents who live within walking distance of a park are 25% more likely to achieve recommended minimum weekly levels of exercise.' By implementing policies that support the availability of parks we ensure that as development continues in Bremerton that new and existing parks, trails and open spaces are equitably accessible allowing for higher rates of activity for all. Healthy Food Access The food we consume, and how accessible it is, has direct effect on our community's health. The more local, fresh produce an individual eats, and the less fast food one consumes, the better their health. When a community has healthy food access, reports show lower diet -related diseases and obesity.' There are multiple factors that contribute to the accessibility of healthy local food, and they include the production, distribution, and retail availability of such food. By supporting our local food system we work to encourage and increase the ability that our community has to provide healthy local food for all residents. Production is the process by which raw food ingredients, such as nuts, vegetables and grains, are transformed into prepared food products, such as peanut butter, soups and bread. Distribution is the way in which food gets transported and delivered to retail sites, such as farmers markets, food banks, grocery stores and restaurants. Retail availability addresses the number of grocery stores, markets, stands and restaurants at which one can purchase (healthy) food. This discussion refers to "food access" as the combination of the availability and affordability of high quality, healthy food in different settings. Healthy food availability means healthy food is physically present on store shelves, in restaurants, farmers' markets, schools and organizational food facilities. This includes the affordability of healthy food, meaning that it is priced low enough to be purchased and consumed on a regular basis by all residents. Low affordability of healthy food can result in food insecurity, a situation in which individuals' ability to acquire healthy food is limited or uncertain.' Parks and Recreation, Trails and Natural Areas Master Plan, City of Gresham, 2009. s Gresham Appendix 49: Health through the Built Environment. 4 Frank, Lawrence et. al. "Linking Objectively Measured Physical Activity with Objectively Measured Urban Form: Findings from SMARTRAQ." American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2005. 5 PolicyLink, The Food Trust. Access to Healthy Food and Why It Matters. htt2://www.policylilik.org/sites/default/files/GROCERYGAP FINAL NOV 2013 .pdf 6 Bickel et al., Guide to Measuring Household Food Security, Revised 2000. Available at ht4)://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec/FILES/FSGuide.pdf. Planning for local food access is a growing topic of interest both locally and around the country. As called out by the Puget Sound Regional Council's Food Blueprints, 'supporting local food is important for the local rural economy, for community food security ... for reducing the distance food travels from farm to table.' Local governments can play a significant role in supporting local agriculture, promoting public health, improving access to healthy and affordable food, reducing environmental impacts, and diverting food waste from landfills.' Transportation, a critical component of distribution, can be costly when associated with perishable food transport and often causes healthier food to be unattainable in lower income and underserved communities. The aim of food related policies in this Comprehensive Plan is to provide all Bremerton residents with the opportunity to access healthy food options through the provision of better transportation, a more supportive and financially feasible production and distribution network and healthy affordable retail. By providing equitable access for Bremerton residents through proximity to healthy food options, we can improve individual eating options and reduce their risk for obesity and diet -related disease. Currently, the retail environment in Bremerton consists of approximately 73 fast food establishments, 3 grocery stores, and a farmers market that occurs twice a week for three hours on Thursdays and three hours on Sundays from May to October. As of 2013, there were 2.4 supermarkets or other grocery stores per 10,000 residents and 9.8 fast food or convenience stores per 10,000 residents, over four times higher than the rate of available grocery stores (See Figure V). Additionally, in Figure VI, below, the areas of Bremerton that are designated as food deserts can be seen for low-income populations. Health Figure V. 2013 Bremerton Area Rate per 10,000 Population Includes zipcodes 98337, 98310, 98311, 98312. Source: US Census Zip Code Business Patterns 12.0 9.8 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.4 2.0 0.0 Supermarket and other grocery Convenience stores+ fast food (except convenience) stores Figure VI Figure VII. Figure VIII. The Impact of Policy on Healthy Food Access Healthy food policies in all three above-mentioned areas of the food system areas can impact the access and health of all Bremerton residents, through support for healthy food retail, supportive zoning for urban agriculture and school gardens and farmers markets, and prioritizing underserved areas. Healthy food retail is beneficial for communities, creating more opportunity to access healthy foods, and subsequently healthier lifestyles, as well as supports the local economy. A presence of a neighborhood supermarkets is correlated with higher produce consumption and lower prevalence of overweight and obesity.'Three times as many supermarkets per capita are located in upper and middle income neighborhoods leading to limited access to heathier food options for lower income households who are 'CDC. Healthier Food Retail: An fiction Guide for Public Health Practitioners. less likely to own a car.$ Policies that encourage equitable distribution of supermarkets, neighborhood healthy food stores, healthy food programs and increase access to healthy food for low income shoppers are all ways in which policy can enhance the support for consumer access. Additionally, whereas an increase in supermarkets has a positive impact on health, a large number of fast food establishments can have the opposite impact; individuals who eat fast food one or more times per week are at increased risk for weight gain, overweight and obesity.' The promotion of healthy, local food products is good for health and business. When healthy products are promoted, consumers purchase these products, sales and demand of these products increase, and prices decrease.10 Healthy food retail in the community also provides additional financial revenue and jobs. Increase local revenues: According to the United States Department of Agriculture, farmers' net revenue increases seven times per unit by selling locally and directly rather than in conventional markets. That revenue stays in communities and recirculates throughout the local economy. Promoting local food production in Bremerton through zoning policy support for community gardens, green houses, school gardens, and vacant lot gardening are policy examples that support access. Local urban food production is a sustainable solution to the issue of food deserts (as seen in Figures VII and VIII). Communities that have implemented urban agriculture report that they consume more fruits and vegetables, reduce hunger, and increase awareness of healthy food.11 Data reports that if youth grow their own vegetables, their vegetable food consumption increases and they report eating less processed foods.12 Through healthy food access zoning, Bremerton has the opportunity to make an impact on the health of the community and generations to come. http://www.cdc.gov.nccdphp/dnpao/state-local-programs/pdf/healthier-food-retail-guide-full.pdf 'Urban and Environmental Policy Institute. Transportation and Food: The Importance of Access. https:Ilwww.accesskent.com/HealthIENTFI s/TransandFoodAccess.12 NACCHO. Healthy Food Access. http://www.naccho.oLvladvocacLIgositions/upload/13-04-Healthv-Food Access -2.12 9 Urban Land Institute. Intersections. Health and the Built Environment http.//uli. oi^Q/wp-conten t/uploads/ULI-Documents/Intersections-Health-and-the-Built-Environment. pdf 10 PolicyLink. Healthy Food, Healthy Communities. http://www.12olicylink.org/sites/default/files/HFHC FULL FINAL 201201 I O.PDF. PolicyLink, The Food Trust. Access to Healthy Food and Why It Matters. http://www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/GROCERYGAP FINAL_NOV2013.pdf "PolicyLink. PolicyLink. Growing Urban Agriculture: Equitable Strategies and Policies for Improving Access to Healthy Food and Revitalizing Communities. http.//www.policylink.org/sites/default/files/URBAN_AG FULLREPORT.PDF 12 Puget Sound Regional Food Policy Council. Food Policy Blueprints http://www.psrc.orQ/growth/oodpolicy1resources-topic/ Projected Land Use Conditions The projected conditions section describes the demands for land created by population and employment growth, and expected changes in social and economic conditions that effect land use. Summary of Population and Employment Projections The population and employment projections that drive this Plan provide the basis upon which other discussions of future conditions are built. Population in Bremerton is expected to grow from approximately 37,700 in 2010 to 53,407 in 2036. Of the total new population of nearly 14,000 people, nearly 9,000, or half, are projected to be in the new neighborhood and district centers (including downtown). That equates to approximately 4,431 units within the Centers. The planning period for this plan is the twenty years between 2016 and 2036. Over that same 20 year planning period the number of jobs is expected to increase approximately 18,800 jobs. Of the total increase of about 18,800 jobs, 13,000, or about 80% are expected to be provided in the various centers, including the downtown and the Puget Sound Industrial Center - Bremerton. Land Demand The population and employment growth summarized above creates demand for new homes, and new places of business and employment. One of the most basic — and fundamental — operations that this Comprehensive Plan achieves is a demonstration that the community has identified adequate land for this future growth and even has surplus area. This demonstration starts with making a projection of the dimensions of that future need. Calculation of future land need is performed in three basic areas, residential land, commercial land, and industrial land. The following section summarizes those calculations. Calculation of Future Residential Land Need The population projections employed in this plan anticipate that the 13,757 new persons (approximately 6,400 household units) expected in the community by 2036 will live in a variety of single family households and multi -family settings. The table below is derived from data in the Kitsap County Buildable Lands Analysis 2014 and illustrates the historic trends in this area. Table LU -A Single Family Housing Types Permitted in Bremerton, 2006-2012 Source data: Kitsap County Buildable Lands Analysis, 2014 Permitted Urban Single Family Zoning Count of New Acres Density Densities by Zone Type Applications Dwelling Grand Total 352 352 67.6 Table LU - B Units (Applied under 1988 Single Family -2 (SF -2) 2 2 0.59 3.39 Zoning Code) Single Family -3 (SF -3) 3 3 0.52 5.77 (Applied under 1988 Low Density Residential (DR) 2 6 Medium Density Family (MF) 4 4 0.5 8 (Applied under 2005 Center Core Residential (CCR) 1 1 0.23 4.35 Zoning Code) Freeway Corridor (FC) 1 1 2.08 0.48 Neighborhood Center (NC) 3 3 0.34 8.82 Low Density Residential (1110) 297 297 59.66 4.98 Bav Vista SAP _ 41 41 _ 3.58 11.45 Grand Total 352 352 67.6 Table LU - B Multifamily Housing Types Permitted in Bremerton, 2006-2012 Source data: Kitsap County Buildable Lands Analysis, 2014 Permitted Urban Multifamily Zoning Count of New Acres Density Densities by Zone Type Applications Dwelling Units (Applied under 1988 Low Density Residential (DR) 2 6 0.57 10.53 Zoning Code) Medium Density Residential (MR) 1 3 0.14 21.43 (Applied under 2005 Zoning Code) Bay Vista SAP 31 202 6.3 32.06 Grand Total 34 _ 211. 7.01 The two tables above present the past — a historical backdrop. Out of the 563 units constructed during 2006-2012, 352 units (or 63%) was single family, with 37% multifamily structures. While the past certainly influences the future, the goals and policies of the 2004 plan and this update represent an attempt by the community to move to a new paradigm. In general, that change is focused on providing a moderate increase in the proportion of future housing opportunity in higher density types. The majority of these opportunities will occur in mixed use centers. In addition to this emphasis, the Plan's community goals and policies also indicate a desire to increase density in existing neighborhoods —both by encouraging smaller lots in new subdivisions, and also by encouraging infill of vacant existing properties. The net result, never -the -less will be small increase in overall density in traditional neighborhoods as well. The following table provides calculation of residential land need for the City of Bremerton's population growth forecast over the twenty year planning period — approximately 14,000 persons. The table is based on four categories of residential uses. If the assumption is made in the "centers (SF + MF)" (single family and multifamily residential uses in centers combined) that 30% of the housing units category are single family uses and 70% are multifamily, it is possible to estimate that more than 50% of the new housing units anticipated by this calculation are in single family types. It is important to note that even within a model that places nearly 60% of new housing units in centers (and nearly 55% of new population) an overall emphasis on single family housing types remains. In fact, the actual proportion of SF types increases over the historic pattern depicted by the data in Table LU -B on the previous page. This is consistent with community goals and policies calling for increased home ownership and supporting traditional neighborhoods, while it also addresses the community's desire to create a new urban experience and living environment - the ability to choose to live in the new mixed-use centers. Table LU -C Net Future Residential Land Need Density Net Acres % of DU Population Type (du/ac) Needed total Household Low High Low High Low High need Size Low High 1. Neighborhood _5 7* 255 402 1,556 1,897 30.28 2.24 3,500 4,250 2. Neighborhood 8 18 28 94 500 1,000 9.97 2 1,000 2,000 (MF) 3. Centers (SF+MF) 20 20 119 143 1,429 1,785 40.25 2.1 3,000 3,750 4. Downtown (MF) 40 40 25 31 2,000 2.250 17.95 2 4.000 4.500 Total 427 670 Total Pop 11,500 14,500 Centers Pop (lines 3&4) 7,000 8,250 *While implementing zoning in the LDR designation may allow up to 10 du/ac, it is estimated here that overall density in that area will not exceed 7 du/ac by the end of the planning period The result of the table above is a calculation of Net acres needed in the four residential housing categories used. In other words, the acres of land required to site the houses and apartments along with their related on-site improvements. However, to calculate the number of Gross acres needed for residential development, allowances must be made for the proportion of land area that will be consumed by roads and streets, and portions of land that are not developable due to the existence of environmental constraints — so-called "critical areas". In Bremerton those proportions have been found to be approximately 15% and 17% respectively. Therefore, the gross land area needed for residential uses is larger than the NET area by a factor of approximately 32%. This document proceeds under the assumption that the actual residential land need is as follows on Table LU -D. type Jeighborhoods Non -Center (MI Centers (SF & M Table LU - D Gross Future Residential Land Needed Ranee of Net Acres Needed Ranee of Gross Acres Needed* 255-402 28-94 119-143 Downtown Center (MF) 25-31 TOTALS 427-670 *Net acreage plus 32% (per the Kitsap County Buildable Land Analysis, 2012) Calculation of Future Commercial Land Need Bremerton 336-531 37-124 157-189 33-41 564-884 Table LU - E Bremerton's Targeted Employment Growth Source: US Census, 2010; OFM ACS, 3 -Year Estimate, 2012; and P Growth 2010 Jobs 2012 Jobs Assumptions 2010-2036 Jobs 28.440 28.167 18.509 SRC/ESD Growth Assumptions 2012-2036 Jobs 18.782 In many ways the calculation of commercial land need is simpler than that for residential land. Employing widely accepted ratios of acreage per population, population growth projections can be converted to projections of need for commercial acreage. The commercial land need calculation below employs ratios of gross land area per population. The calculation is based on information supplied by the Washington State Department of Community Development in, "Preparing the Heart of Your Comprehensive Plan, A Land Use Element Guide" (WSDCD, April 1993). The ratios are different for the two primary types of commercial growth anticipated by this comprehensive plan. Those types are; 1) centers commercial, which assumes more compact commercial business employing less parking; and 2) non -center commercial, a more automobile -oriented model typically found along busy arterials in most American cities. Centers include downtown, district centers, neighborhood center, employment center, and Puget Sound Industrial Center — Bremerton. Table LU - F Future Gross Commercial Land Needed Type Population Acres/1000 Net Acres Gross Acres Served population' Needed2 Needed Center 11,500 6.5 _ 75 51 Commercial Non -Center _ 7,500 10 _ 75 51 Commercial Total Population 19,000 102 acres Growth 1. Acres needed per 1,000 population derived from discussion of Washington communities found in, "Preparing the Heart of Your Comprehensive Plan, A Land Use Element Guide" WSDCD, April 1993, page 62-63. 2. Gross land needed equals net +32% per the Kitsap Countv Buildable Land Report, 2014 The city has the capacity with the proposed Land Use designations to serve the 102 acres needed to accommodate the 20 -year employment growth. However, that number is conservative as Bremerton currently has many vacant buildings that can help absorb a portion of the growth. In addition to an assurance that sufficient acres of commercial land are provided on the land use map and placed in appropriate locations, this plan addresses an additional concern; that a variety of sizes of commercial parcels be provided. It is recognized that a wide variance exists is this arena. In other words, while smaller businesses can locate in many areas of the City, including the new centers, at least some commercially designated parcels must be of sufficient size to accommodate larger types of businesses. Calculation of Future Industrial Land Need The calculation of future industrial land needed is similar to that for commercial land. The 1993 American Planning Association (APA) study also reported that, in the average American city, industrial land also amounted to about 11 gross acres per thousand population. Employing that simple ratio, it can be calculated that to accommodate the expected population increase of 14,000 persons, 154 acres (gross) of additional industrial land must be available. Once again the population associated with employment centers was not included in this calculation as there are no industrial lands associated directly with that population. It is not necessary to locate industrial lands in the community generally to accommodate this aspect of overall population growth. In addition, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) conducted An Industrial Land Analysis for Central Puget Sound Region, March 2015 (_http://www.psrc.org/growth/industrial-lands/). This regional effort reviewed PSRC's jurisdictions (King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap counties) industrial lands for capacity and potential demand. The following table has been provided from that report. Forecasts for employment in the PSIC-Bremerton Subarea show that the majority of the growth (72%) is anticipated to occur in industrial jobs. This forecast reflects anticipated growth more than the redevelopment of existing industrial space since the subarea is currently largely undeveloped with a significant amount of vacant land, as well as forest lands and wetlands. It is also currently served by few transportation facilities. The 3,266 new industrial jobs could require 210 to 300 additional acres of land (built at a jobs density ranging from 700 s.f. to 1,000 s.f., per employee, which fits the land uses anticipated in the area.). Accommodating non -industrial job growth at modest densities for this area (300 s.f. per job, FARs of 0.5) would require an additional 17 acres of land. The 2,414 vacant acres could easily accommodate these forecasts with little change in development patterns in the area. Summary of Additional Land Need The following table summarizes the calculations of land need discussed in the preceding sections. Table LU — F Summary of Additional Land Needed Type Additional Additional Land Underutilized/Vacant Land Needed Needed (gross Land Provided by the (net acres) acres) Plan (net acres) Non -centers SF 255-402 336-531 1150 Non -centers MF 28-94 37-124 350 Centers (SF + MF) 119-143 157-189 200 Downtown MF _25-31 33-41 _ 50 Total Residential 427-670 564-884 1,750 Center Commercial 51 75 250 Non -center 51 75 350 Commercial Total Commercial 102 150 600 Industrial 105 154 2,500 Total acres Needed 634-877 868-1,188 4,850 Land Supply This comprehensive plan must demonstrate that adequate land exists to accommodate the projected growth. To make this demonstration, the following section will compare the land needs discussed above with the designations depicted on the Land Use Map found in the Land Use Element. Residential Land Supply The land needs analysis above indicates that between 427 and 670 net acres of additional residential land will be needed over the next 20 years to accommodate the expected population increase. This estimate is comprised of two primary components, non -centers residential need and centers residential need. Of 14,300 new population, approximately 9,000 are intended to be accommodated in Centers, while the remaining 5,300 distributed as "infill" to non -centers locations. Residential population in non -centers locations The Kitsap County Buildable Land Report, 2014 estimates that, in 2012, there were 840 net vacant residential acres in Bremerton. The Buildable Land Analysis also estimates that there was an additional 642 net acres of "underutilized" residential lands, as many lots within the City may be redeveloped at a higher use (such as a single family lot becoming subdivided). If the 840 acres that are clearly available for locating residential uses is discounted by a 30% market factor (described more in following pages), it can be estimated that about 588 acres is likely to be available for residential development. By dividing the 588 acres into the 7,000 population and employing an assumed household size of 2.24 persons, it is calculated that by employing an average density of 7.5 units per acre the expected population can be accommodated on the available acres. This density is within the range assigned to the Low Density Residential land use designation in this Plan. During implementation of this comprehensive plan, care will be taken to assure that average density in new residential areas (outside of centers) in that range is enabled under zoning and subdivision regulations. The availability of some amount of "redevelopable" residential land (the some portion of the 642 acres referenced in the Kitsap Buildable Lands Analysis and above) increases the level of confidence here that the expected population will be accommodated on available lands. Note: A large proportion of the available lands employed in this calculation are currently designated for low density residential, with a relatively small portion of medium to high density residential uses. However, this analysis does consider that some areas have been redesignated to higher density residential land to accommodate existing nonconforming uses. In Sum, the calculations discussed above demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity on existing lands outside of centers to accommodate the expected increase in population assigned to those areas. While the demonstrated capacity is at the low and of the range of need calculated in this Plan, it must be noted that the number employed uses a significant market factor. In addition, it is known that there is a high amount of excess capacity available in centers that would be able to accept additional residential growth (see discussion below). This acts as "market factor". This is more fully explained in the following paragraphs. Residential population in centers The population projection employed by this Comprehensive Plan was developed under an assumption about the potential population accommodation of centers as designated and conceived by the Plan. In other words, once a community decision to employ the centers concept was arrived at, and once the potential centers were identified, sized, and assumptions about densities and mixes of uses in each center were developed, these factors were employed to calculate population accommodation potential. In addition, full build -out population of each center is tempered by assumptions that much less than full potential build -out will occur during the current 20 -year planning period. The population accommodation assumptions employed for centers in this plan represent only 20-50% of the total potential population in any given center. As the assumed proportion of potential full build out of each center is limited as described above, it is also understood that, in effect, a "market factor" is built into the amount of land truly available in the designated centers. Depending in the particular center that market factor ranges from 50% to 80% (or the inverse of the build out assumptions employed). Given the methodology described above, it can be easily stated that the centers -related proportion of overall population increases in the City during the 20 -year planning period are accommodate by design. Commercial Land Supply Vacant commercial land need is calculated in two major categories, centers commercial and non -centers commercial. These needs are calculated at 51 acres each (as described earlier in this appendix) Centers commercial land is calculated. This indicates the proportion of each mixed use center that that is expected to be available for commercial uses. Those lands total 600 acres. This number exceeds the amounted needed (102 acres). This excess is attributable to the expectation that not all of the available commercial land in centers will be built -out during the initial 20 -year planning period. This excess is related to total full build out potential for each center in exactly the same manner as that for population and residential land. In other words, commercial land "market factors" for centers are also in the 50% to 80% range as discussed previously. The non -centers commercial land need is calculated at 51 acres. An estimate of vacant commercial land outside of centers designations was performed by City staff using GIS technology and aerial photography. That estimate reveals that there are approximately 615 acres of such land designated, with approximately 120 acres available for development. This, once again exceeds the calculated need. The issue of parcel size is crucial in such calculations and discussions. Commercial development occurs at a variety of scales. It is important that at least some commercial properties are of sufficient scale to accommodate larger stores and commercial establishments. The City analysis indicates that several larger parcels are available in or near the Wheaton/Riddell and Wheaton/Sheridan District Centers as well as within the designated employment center. While these western areas are formally designated for industrial uses, the employment centers designation also calls for mixing commercial (and residential) uses. Industrial Land Supply The land needs analysis in the previous section indicates that approximately 154 new acres of vacant industrial land is needed within the twenty year planning period to accommodate the expected population increase. All three scenario maps indicate large tracts of industrial designations in the western areas of the City. Of the approximately 3,700 total acres in PSIC-Bremerton and the City's additional industrial land, 2,500 acres is currently vacant. Table LU — G Estimates of 20 Year Population and Employment of Centers and Noncenters Total Acres Avg. Res. Density (du/ac) Sum of Population (People) Sum of Dwellings (Households) Sum of Employment (Jobs) Centers* Downtown Regional Center(DRC) 138 40 4,355 2,188 3,463 District Center — Wheaton/Riddell 94 20 1,910 909 670 District Center— Wheaton/Sheridan 77 20 1,288 613 318 District Centers — Charleston 125 20 489 232 124 DCC Totals 3,687 1,754 1,112 Neighborhood Center — Manette 19 15 106 51 50 Employment Center (EC) 82 40 750 350 450 Bay Vista 73 20 550 255 70 East Park 58 15 320 150 20 Non Centers Freeway Commercial (FC) 324 0 0 0 1075 General Commercial (GC) 273 30 450 210 825 Neighborhood Business (NB) 18 15 30 15 35 Higher Education (HE) 47 20 90 190 76 Industrial (1) 390 0 0 0 1,525 Table of Contents Current Conditions.................................................................................................................... H Appendix -2 Existing Housing Stock.......................................................................................................... H Appendix -4 Typeof Housing Units........................................................................................................... H Appendix -7 Ageof Housing Units............................................................................................................. H Appendix -8 Occupancy........................................................................................................................... H Appendix -10 Affordability........................................................................................................................ H Appendix -12 National Housing Market Analysis Overview: ................................................................. H Appendix -12 HousingConditions............................................................................................................. H Appendix -16 Housing Resources.............................................................................................................. H Appendix -17 Public and Assisted Housing Opportunities........................................................................ H Appendix -19 Special Needs Housing Opportunities................................................................................. H Appendix -20 Temporary and Transitional Housing Opportunities.......................................................... H Appendix -22 Future Housing Projections..................................................................................................... H Appendix -23 Calculation of Future Residential Land Need...................................................................... H Appendix -23 Residential Land Supply...................................................................................................... H Appendix -26 Glossary................................................................................................................................... H Appendix -27 Current Conditions Recent trends, local demographics, and characteristics of the housing stock present a significant challenge if Bremerton is to live up to its legacy as a great place to reside. Current conditions in the local housing market, detailed in this section, are in large part, the result of deteriorating local economics and a gradual weakening of the residential qualities of the city's aging neighborhoods. The data, however, also portrays the opportunity to capitalize on Bremerton's well established neighborhoods, the city's unique position in the greater Puget Sound economy, and, lastly, to capitalize on regional and national housing trends. The City of Bremerton's population has essentially been stagnant for the past 40 years. The decennial census reports from 1970 to 2010 shows a negligible increase of less than 2,500 people. Over such a time span, this is an insignificant increase (less than 1/5 of 1% annual growth), easily dismissible in Bremerton where there are regular fluctuations in the military population of two to three thousand people, due to the arrival and departure of Navy personnel. Furthermore, the most recent U.S. Census report (April 2010) stands out from previous census counts for actually showing a decrease in the city's population (413 people) since the 1990 Census (minimal increase in population from 2000 of about 500 people). The only other decrease on record was reported between census years 1950 and 1960, due to a downswing of city's population from its all-time high associated with World War II activity at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. At the height of World War II, Bremerton's housing stock came under severe stress, when a population of 72,500 required immediate shelter among a housing stock in place for a 1940 population of around 15,000 people. While it is not unheard of for a well-established city to have either a stable or slightly decreasing population count over time, Bremerton's lack of growth in the past 40 years, despite land use capacity, eludes both past and current growth forecasts. More glaring, the surrounding county and region have witnessed unprecedented growth in the past twenty years. During this time, the whole of Kitsap County, for example, went from a population of 147,152 in 1980 to a population of 251,133 in 2010, (20,000 population increase from 2000) an increase of nearly 70%. Bremerton's proportion of the county's total population and regional growth has dramatically decreased, beginning in 1970. (See Table HSA-1) As Table HSA-1 demonstrates, Bremerton's population represents a steady percentage of the total Kitsap County population despite land capacity within the City to accommodate significant numbers of new people. Evidently, the housing and development market in Bremerton has proven to be uncompetitive with surrounding areas. There are numerous causes for this, on both the supply and demand side of the housing market. Supply-side factors include the higher cost to redevelop existing city lots verses the abundance of undeveloped parcels and new development opportunities in the County, including its own Urban Growth Areas. Bremerton's somewhat outdated housing stock, dating back to the previous growth periods of 1940's and 1960's, often fails to address contemporary market demands or to address the diverse market demand for housing. Today's market demands partially reflect demographic changes which are discussed throughout this document, in areas such as household type, size, income level, and special needs populations. Overarching demographic dynamics which include substantial growth in Senior citizens, Singles (Non -Married, no children), and Single Parent Households, will out pressure on the housing market to provide a variety of housing types. Table HSA-1 Bremerton's Historical Population Growth: 1940-2014 Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management & U.S. Census of Population and Housing Year Population Population Change Percent of County Population Reports, U.S. Census (as reported on April 11t of every 10th year), 1940 — 2010 1940 15,134 - 34.1% 1950 27,678 +12,544 36.6% 1960 26,681 -997 31.7% 1970 35,307 +8,626 34.7% 1980 36,208 +901 24.6% 1990 38,142 +1,934 20.1% 2000 37,259 -883 16% 2010 37,729 +470 15% Population Estimates, Washington State Office of Financial Management (as reported April 1st of each year) 2011 38,790 +1,061 15% 2012 39,650 +860 16% 2013 37,850 -1,800 15% 2014 38,180 +330 15% The overall median income of the County is relatively high, estimated at $62,413 for 2013. The overall median income in the City of Bremerton however is much lower at $43,183. The figure is bolstered by the County's long shoreline and concentration of wealth in many of the waterfront households. In Kitsap County there some households living in housing considered substandard, overcrowded, or severely overcrowded. These numbers are relatively low when compared to the number of households in Kitsap County overall. There are considerably more cost burdened households and some residents with zero or negative income. In the City of Bremerton there are severely cost burdened households with a large percentage paying over 35 percent or more of their income for housing costs. Kitsap County's housing stock overall is less than 50 years old and in standard or better condition. The housing stock in Bremerton is significantly older than other areas of the County. The median year that housing units were built is 1960 while for Kitsap County the median year is 1981. Increasing housing costs and a low-income population hinder the overall ability of residents to afford housing within the City. Existing Housing Stock Characteristics of the existing housing stock include type, occupancy, age, condition, and affordability, as detailed in sections following this general summary. By comparing the housing stocks of the city and the wider Kitsap community, the characteristics of Bremerton's existing housing stock, and its current position in the development and housing market emerges. This position can then be advanced and improved upon. Census 2010 reports a total of 17,273 housing units (14,932 occupied) in the City of Bremerton. This is a 3.9% increase (642 new units) since the 16,631 dwelling units reported in 2000. Bremerton's population increased by 470 people between 2000 and 2010. The discrepancy between an increasing housing stock and a lower population count can be partially explained by an increased vacancy rate in the 2010 census, to just over a 13% vacancy rate (2341 units) in 2010, versus a 6% vacancy rate in 1990 (897 units.) Vacancy rates in the Bremerton are strongly influenced by the arrival and departure of ships and their crews at the Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton (NBK-B). This is evident particularly in Bremerton where the vacancy rate can rise and fall dramatically due to its relatively smaller housing stock universe and its proximity to NBK-B. A market equilibrium vacancy rate is commonly estimated to be 5%, which is closer to the 2010 Census vacancy rate reported for the county at 9.5%. Bremerton's unique housing demands require a built-in flexibility in its housing stock, or generally higher quantities of units than average vacancy rates and population counts would suggest for communities with more stable population numbers. Though largely attributed to military deployments in Bremerton, a generally lower number of people per household is another factor to consider in looking at the needs of current residents, especially as the percentage of smaller households is growing in long-term national trend analysis. Household size is an especially important factor in projecting housing needs and ensuring a housing market that will be better attuned to changing national and regional demographics. It will be further addressed in following sections, which will also look at Bremerton's demographics to better understand local needs for housing types. The smaller size of existing units, detailed in the first subsection below titled, "Type of Housing Units", is an obvious factor underlying Bremerton's smaller household size and its overcrowding rates. The city's relatively lower income levels and higher poverty status, detailed under "Affordability" are also related, complicating the challenge of meeting housing needs and providing healthy residential settings. Table HSA -2 Housing Units and Population: Bremerton and Kitsap County Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management & U.S. Census of Population and Housing More recent quantifiable changes in the Bremerton's housing stock are identifiable in local building permit records. Between 2006 and 2012, Bremerton's demolition activity was approximately 700 units (161 single family and 540 multifamily units) largely due to the redevelopment of Bay Vista (formerly West Park), and expansion of the Olympic College. In that same time period approximately 600 units were constructed (353 single family units and 137 multifamily units). 1980 1990 2000 2010 Bremerton Population 36,209 38,142 (+5.5%) 37,259(-2.5%0) 37,729 Housing Units 14,960 15,693 (+6%) 16,631 (+6%) 17,273 Households 14,067 14,718 (+5%) 15,085 (+2.5%) 14,932 (HH) _ Persons per 2.31 2.34 2.3 2.24 Household Kitsap County Population 147,152 189,731 (+29%) 231,969 (+22.5%) 251,133 Housing Units 57,327 74,038 (+29%) 92,644(+25%0) 107,367 Households 52,809 69,267 (+31%) 86,416 (+25%) 97,220 Persons per 2.6 2.5 2.6 2.5 Household More recent quantifiable changes in the Bremerton's housing stock are identifiable in local building permit records. Between 2006 and 2012, Bremerton's demolition activity was approximately 700 units (161 single family and 540 multifamily units) largely due to the redevelopment of Bay Vista (formerly West Park), and expansion of the Olympic College. In that same time period approximately 600 units were constructed (353 single family units and 137 multifamily units). Though there were more demolitions then construction of units, it must be noted that the time period stated above was during the Financial Crisis of 2008. Prior to 2008, the City was receiving about 70 single family permits per year for 2006 and 2007 (at the end of the housing boom). During the recession, financing was difficult to obtain for housing and many jurisdictions saw little or no activity. However, the City continued to get a flow of permits between 2008 and the subsequent years as illustrated in the table below. Type of Housing Units Of the 17,723 units reported in Census 2010, the majority (approximately 58%) are contained in free standing single unit structures while nearly half the housing units (40%) are in classified as multifamily housing (attached) units. The remaining 2% of units, traditionally not considered single units or multi- family units, is made up of mobile homes, trailers, or other special housing units such as houseboats.' These units represent nontraditional housing types and can be used, in sum, to help evaluate how well traditional housing choices serve the existing population and housing market. Table HSA -4 Bremerton Housing Units by Type: 1980-1990-2000-2010 Source: 1980/1990/2000/2010 Census of Population and Housing, STF 1A; Puget Sound Regional Council Type 1980 1990 2000 2010 # % of Total # % of Total # % of Total # % of Total 1 unit, detached 7060 47.2% 7700 49.1% 7,917 47.6% 8,414 48% 1 unit, attached 1169 7.8% 1490 9.5% 1,090 6.6% 1,697 10% Total, Single Units 8,229 55% 9,190 59% 9,007 54% 10,111 58% 2 -Units 1,685 11.3% 1,543 9.8% 1,664 10% 1,168 7% 3 & 4 Units 1,117 7.5% 1149 7.3% 1,421 8.5% 974 6% 5+ Units 2,554 17.1% 3,432 22% 4204 25% 4,860 28% Total, Multifamily 5,356 35.8% 6,124 39% 7,289 44% 7,002 40% Units Mobile Home/Trailer 173 1.2% 216 1.4% 286 1.7% 270 2% Other Units* 1202 8% 163 1% 49 .3% 0 0 Total Units = 14,960 100% 15,693 100% 16,631 100% 17,383 100% * "Other Units" definition has varied, yielding irregularities in these numbers 'The Census uses the term "mobile home or trailer" to refer to mobile homes to which no permanent rooms have been added. While not clearly differentiated in Census, manufactured housing affixed to a foundation, are not considered or counted as either "mobile homes' or "other housing" in counts of single family and multifamily units. Age of Housing Units Over half of Kitsap County's housing units have been built since 1980. The City of Bremerton has the largest inventory of aging housing in the County. In the City of Bremerton 77.3% of housing units were built before 1980 and 22.4% were built in 1939 or earlier. In the City of Bremerton rehabilitation of the aging housing stock is a high need. Over three-quarters of the housing units were built before 1980, nearly one-quarter before WWII. Many of these housing units are solidly built and structurally sound but in need of energy efficiency improvements and upgrades to preserve them for the long-term. The older age of Bremerton's housing stock, with an associated increased cost for maintenance, has an impact on the conditions of housing, as detailed below, particularly in common deference of maintenance as homes approach obsolescence in today's market for homeowners. Table HSA -5 Bremerton Age of Housing Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5 -Year Estimates Year Structure Built Number Percent Total Number of Housing Units 17,396 Built 2010 to 2013 119 0.7% Built 2000 to 2009 1,195 6.9% Built 1990 to 1999 1,214 7.0% Built 1980 to 1989 1,436 8.3% Built 1970 to 1979 2,568 14.8% Built 1960 to 1969 1,837 10.5% Built 1950 to 1959 1,977 11.4% Built 1940 to 1949 3,154 18.1% Built 1939 or earlier 3,896 22.4% Based on the 2010 Census, the City of Bremerton has a high rental to owner occupant rate, 57.5% of Bremerton residents rent to 42.5% buyers. Single-family owner units are available at relatively low prices, but the demand isn't there because of this need for extensive and expensive renovation in many of the structures, as well as stricter loan standards and higher down payment requirements which limit the number of potential buyers. More affluent buyers will tend to favor newer construction, in other more attractive parts of the City or even the County. The rental market is stronger because of the transient nature of the community which creates an increased demand, especially for more modern or better kept buildings. Rents tend to increase, even for poorer buildings, exacerbating the cost burden issue for low-income households. Landlords are often unable to make costly repairs to their rental units thereby creating unsafe and a lower quality of housing for some low-income households as well. With the Navy presence, Bremerton will always have a higher -than -average rental rate, but with efforts to improve the housing stock, new homeownership can be attract to our city. These aging units typically have more issues related to upkeep than buildings built more recently. As home maintenance and improvement projects are necessary with older housing, more residents will be faced with increasing housing costs, which hinder the overall ability of residents to afford housing in these jurisdictions over time. Also, many of these older homes lack energy efficiency. This poses two problems: environmental concerns and higher utility costs for occupants. Older homes may also present health hazards due to their potential to contain lead-based paint and/or asbestos. Many of these holder housing units require some degree to bring them to current, acceptable building standards. Aging housing is also important in regards to renter -occupied units. When renters occupy older housing, housing quality and occupant safety concerns become more of an issue because many of the owners may not have much of an incentive to invest time and money into maintenance and improvements. Thus, over time rental units begin to deteriorate and suffer from deferred maintenance. Geographic analysis shows that the concentration of older housing stock overlaps with a concentration of low to moderate income families. Areas which have a greater than 51% concentration of low and moderate income persons are located in a higher percentage primarily in West Bremerton, and a slightly lower percentage in East Bremerton. Housing units built before 1978, also concentrated primarily in West Bremerton are more likely to contain lead-based paint and are more likely in need of major repair. Yet, these houses are occupied by families least likely to have the financial means to correct either potential lead hazards or make all other needed repairs. The City's low/moderate Census Tracts are all in need of reinvestment through owner and rental housing rehabilitation. Occupancy Of 4,255 persons living in group quarters in 2010, 79% (3,370 people) lived in military quarters. While this number fluctuates with ship deployments by the U.S. Navy, (reported as 77% in 2000, and 83% of the 1990 group housing population), the military population regularly represents the vast majority of group -housing in Bremerton. There are few other long-term shelters and there is one multifamily Olympic College housing option. The next largest percentage of group housing, after military group housing, is accounted for by a growing population in local nursing and convalescent homes. Demographic changes and the relocation of Harrison Hospital, and the impacts with the associated local medical community, will impact the population, including group quarters. Non family households, where non -relatives live together, maintain a substantial presence in Bremerton with a 2010 Census to 47% of all households, while this percentage is only 29% countywide. The trend away from family households which are composed of either married couples or children related to the head of household, continues in Bremerton where it was reported at 38% in 1980 and 40% in 1990. This is significant in terms of providing units for existing residents and demographics but also for realizing that Bremerton's neighborhoods are becoming less and less characterized by "single family" living. This demographic trend is one of several that this Comprehensive Plan looks at as it re -orients community strategies. Specifically, this is one of the primary trends that new urban living environments such as "centers" have been shown to be successful in addressing. The majority of housing units in Bremerton are occupied by "renters", with the 2010 Census report showing 57.5% of specified dwelling units being occupied by renters and only 42.5% of units being owner -occupied. These percentages are exactly reversed in the wider Kitsap community which shows a rate of 68% owner occupied and 32% of units being renter -occupied. The percentage of owner -occupied homes has generally declined throughout the region, likely due to unprecedented increases in housing costs, but Bremerton shows the most severe decline in home ownership rates, from 43% in the 1980 Census, to 39% in the 1990 Census, and, in Census 2000, at 37%, the lowest level ever reported by the Census for the City of Bremerton. (Table HSA -5) Recent increases in residential property values and sales activity in the City of Bremerton suggest improving conditions for homeownership. However, any short-term gains in owner -occupied units may be off -set by investors who continue to buy and hold local properties for investment purposes, especially with the current, unprecedented low interest rates for home mortgages. Low mortgage rates and increasing values, in other words, attract both new owners and new investors. Significant change in this area will only accompany an expansion of the existing housing stock to better meet the area's evident homeowner market. In doing so, affordability issues arise for the existing population. Affordability is also addressed later as a factor in looking at future housing needs, following further examination of the conditions of the existing housing stock. Percent 43% 68% Percent 57% 32% Table HSA -6 Occupied Units: Specified Owner or Renter, 1980-2010 Specified Owner -Occupied Units 1980 1990 2000 2010 Place Total Percent Total Percent Total Percent Total Bremerton 6,082 43% 5,755 39% 5,259 37% 6,380 Kitsap 35,552 67.5% 44,539 64.5% 46,779 63% 66,425 County Specified Renter -Occupied Units 1980 1990 2000 2010 Place Total Percent Total Percent Total Percent Total Bremerton 7,985 57% 8.963 61% 8,933 63% 8,552 Kitsap 17,257 32.5% 24,728 35.5% 27,944 37% 30,795 County Recent increases in residential property values and sales activity in the City of Bremerton suggest improving conditions for homeownership. However, any short-term gains in owner -occupied units may be off -set by investors who continue to buy and hold local properties for investment purposes, especially with the current, unprecedented low interest rates for home mortgages. Low mortgage rates and increasing values, in other words, attract both new owners and new investors. Significant change in this area will only accompany an expansion of the existing housing stock to better meet the area's evident homeowner market. In doing so, affordability issues arise for the existing population. Affordability is also addressed later as a factor in looking at future housing needs, following further examination of the conditions of the existing housing stock. Percent 43% 68% Percent 57% 32% Affordability At first glance, housing costs in Bremerton appear to be most affordable in the region, with the lowest costs in a county that has been witnessing exceptional increases in housing costs. However, the increase in housing costs is also present in East and West Bremerton where the impacts on affordability are more severe due to relatively less elastic, lower income populations. In other words, Bremerton citizens must now spend a greater percentage of their income to continue to afford to buy or rent housing as prices climb. In addition, with reinvestment and revitalization efforts quite apparent in Bremerton, housing costs should continue to increase, possibly bringing a market for comparable units more in line with other Seattle -satellite cities than with the outlying, less urban, jurisdictions of Kitsap County. Kitsap County and the cities cumulatively permitted 5,492 new housing units from 2006-2012. County- wide, new single family units accounted for 89.9 percent and multifamily units accounted for 10.1 percent of new units permitted (source: Kitsap Buildable Lands Report, 2014). Building permits declined during the recession, however as the economy has recovered building permit activity has increased. Construction of multifamily housing may be slow to recover due to the lengthy financing and development process for multi -family properties. National Housing Market Analysis Overview: Nationally, homeownership rates have fallen back to 1993 levels. The decline can be attributed to several factors including the effects of the recession on household formation and first time homebuyers, decline in household incomes since the start of the recession, and restricted access to financing. At the same time there has been a strong increase in demand for rental units. As the vacancy rate for rentals has declined, rent increases continue to outpace inflation. To meet the surge in demand for rental units, the number of single-family detached homes in the rental market increased and developers also responded to soaring demand by steadily expanding the multifamily housing supply. Despite this expansion of the stock, rental markets nationally continued to tighten in 2014. The national vacancy rate dipped to 7.6 percent, its lowest point in nearly 20 years. As a result rents rose at a 3.2% rate last year — twice the pace of overall inflation. (Source: The State of the Nation's Housing 2015, Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University). Home sales have increased overall in Washington State but are still recovering from the recession. A typical first-time buyer can't afford most homes for sale. The median renter household income in 2012 across the Washington State was $36,778. This means that a typical first-time homebuyer, paying no more than 30% of that income on housing, could afford to purchase a $145,201 home. The median priced home in Bremerton is $215,700 and Kitsap County in 2012 was $233,000. (Source: Washington State Housing Needs Assessment 2015) City of Bremerton and Kitsap County, like all jurisdictions in Washington State, have land use policies implementing the Growth Management Act. In general these policies drive new development towards designated urban growth areas that can support higher densities and better infrastructure such as sewers, public water supply, storm -water controls, more efficient transportation systems and public parks. Bremerton and Kitsap County engage in ongoing efforts to advance policy for increasing the supply of affordable housing. The City has made efforts to streamline the permit process and include incentives for affordable housing development, such as the Multifamily Tax Exemption. New development of housing is expensive and the cost is ultimately passed on to homebuyers and renters. For new housing units to be affordable to households with incomes below 50% Area Median Income (AMI) there typically must be some level of subsidy to bring the cost below market level. This subsidy, most often from Federal and State sources, has been shrinking. The result has been a decline in the production of new units and fewer resources to preserve existing housing and provide housing vouchers (rent assistance). This means the supply of affordable housing is more constrained as demand grows, prices increase and more households compete for the same supply of affordable units. Nationally, most of the recent increase in rental supply has come from single-family homes. Since the Recession there has been an increase in conversions of owner -occupied single-family homes to rentals. The American Community Survey reports that the number of single-family homes rented during this period increased by 3.2 million, roughly twice the number of new apartments added, pushing the single- family share of all rentals from 30% in 2006 to 34%. New multifamily construction typically adds units at the upper end of the rent distribution, well out of reach for households with limited incomes. At the same time, owners of existing low -rent properties have little revenue to cover operating and maintenance costs, leaving these units at risk of removal. (Source: NLIHC, Out of Reach 2015). The difference in home prices between the city and the surrounding parts of the county can be attributed in a large part to the quantity and diversity of their respective housing inventories. For example, many home sales in Central Kitsap are of new homes, while most sales in Bremerton are of older homes. Older homes, especially those with relatively fewer bedrooms, smaller yards, and lower investment costs, are often converted into rental properties and are absent from the market for homeownership. A higher percentage of rental properties in Bremerton than elsewhere in the County results in fewer affordable houses available to first-time, low and moderate income buyers in Bremerton. This exacerbates the challenge Bremerton residents face in their attempts to obtain an affordable entry-level home within the City. As seen in the table above, nearly 40% of Bremerton's current rental population is paying more than what is deemed affordable for rental housing. This translates to over a third of the total population living in rental properties that they cannot truly afford. With increasing housing costs throughout the County, housing affordability is obviously a pressing regional issue, challenging policy makers in both housing and economic development. In fact, despite generally higher income levels in the rest of the County, rental properties countywide have been shown as equally unaffordable. Demand is evidently high for the existing rental opportunities, especially in Bremerton with its highly transitory and young population (ages 25-44 regularly the largest cohort in census counts, suggesting an infusion of this age (often navy personnel), and not an aging of the existing population). This demographic helps fuse the rental market and continues to constrain the inventory of existing units for purchase, especially the affordable entry-level units that are positioned to get a large return from the existing rental market. An additional qualifier when comparing this data for affordability, and an important factor in assessing the housing stock, is that the inventory of homes in Bremerton is much smaller than the County. This makes comparisons rather difficult as a smaller pool of data can cause exaggeration as compared to change that is demonstrated amid a larger or more diverse inventory. Often, the cost of homes is tied to the supply of comparable homes as opposed to simple appreciation of the housing stock. An increase in the inventory of homes (supply) in Bremerton, potentially enticed by the current increase in value and demonstrated regional demand, could then bring greater diversity and greater affordability to the existing housing stock. The issue of housing affordability is a county -wide issue. The availability of affordable housing is crucial for lower income households, which more often face limited choices, including geographic options. A lack of affordable housing distributed equitably and near work places, forces people to live farther from their jobs, despite the magnified impact of transportation costs. Higher densities and Bremerton's urban setting has also resulted in a higher percentage of multi -family units built over the years, particularly older apartment complexes, that now heavily rely on the Federal government's Section 8 program that subsidizes rental costs for low income households. The subsequent, disproportionate, amount of the county's subsidized and public housing in Bremerton has resulted in a concentrated number of low income people, and with that concentration, weakened tax revenues yet higher needs for public services. However, Bremerton might have even more subsidized income households if more of its housing stock qualified for federal certificates and vouchers. Unfortunately, a great deal of the city's housing stock is of too low a quality to be used for publicly subsidized housing and is thus, truly detracting from quality, stable residential settings. It is important for the Comprehensive Plan to encourage property owner to rehabilitate the aging housing space. Military personnel and their families living in the community represent a significant impact on housing and local rents that should be considered. Military stipends paid for housing often represent the maximum rent that landowners can charge to rent out their property. Table HSA -9 Military Housing Allowance, Bremerton 2013 Source: United States Department of Defense (Military.com), 2015 MonthlyRange Annual Range Min Max _ Min Max Personnel with dependents $1,221 $2,082 $14,652 $24,984 Personnel without dependents $1,032 $1,755 $12,384 $21,060 In the City of Bremerton the non -housing community development need is centered on the communities need for jobs. The City has an unemployment rate of 6.5% compared to 5.5% in Washington State, and 5.3% in Kitsap County. The City has chosen to focus its efforts on economic development with the goal of creating and sustaining jobs for its residents. The low/mod percentage is comparatively high with 61% city-wide and 69% within the Downtown Regional Center. In 2015, the City Council determined that targeting Community Block Grant (CDBG) funds in this center which includes a designated blighted area will provide a strategy to come up with a strong economic development and housing focus which will abate these blighted conditions, as well as utilizing limited funds in a way that can provide the best opportunity for leverage. Public facilities will be eligible for funding as long as they are within the target area known as the "Downtown Regional Center." The intention is to focus on capital projects that curb slum and blight, improve public facilities, and invest in economic development. Preservation of housing is also critical. It is more cost effective to keep people housed. If housing units are lost, households are forced to find a new place to live that is affordable, adding to the already increased demand for affordable housing. Minor rehabilitation is less expensive than production of new units and has the added benefit of also improving the neighborhood. Production of new units, although expensive, is also needed. New units may be created through the acquisition and rehabilitation of existing market rate housing or through new construction. Additional units of permanent affordable housing that targets special needs populations and individuals with housing barriers is needed. Housing Conditions A study of Kitsap County Assessor data also revealed that less than 10% of Bremerton's occupied single family housing units rated as being in fair, poor or very poor condition. Kitsap County Assessor "fair" assumes to have only minor deficiencies. Structures rated "poor" or "very poor" are assume to that they have substantial deficiencies (e.g. cracked foundation or need new roof). Table HSA — 10 Housing Condition (Buildings) Source: Kitsap County Assessor's Office, 2015 Type Excellent Very Good Average Fair Poor Very Total Good Poor Single Family 284 1142 3138 3657 388 103 43 8755 Manufactured Home 3 1 23 120 10 23 _14 162 Duplex 18 80 304 437 74 2 929 Triplex 3 1024 25 9 1 0 72 _Fourplex 1 _7 3 36 6 0 0 53 Total Buildings 309 1240 34924275 487 120 48 9971 Percent 3% 12% 35%. 43% 5% 1% 1% Substandard housing will need to be replaced or rehabilitated in the next 20 years. In addition to the existing substandard units, additional units can be expected to become substandard each year. A rule of thumb is that, based on typical survival rates of existing housing stock, 2% of units at least 25 years old will become substandard each year. The estimate of units to be replaced or rehabilitated is based on the following assumptions • A backlog of 156 units rated "poor" or "very poor" must be rehabilitated or replaced in the next 20 years -- an average of 8 per year. • An additional 268 housing units are expected to become substandard each year (2% of approximately 13,432 built before 1980). Therefore, the replacement or rehabilitation of 268 units per year will eliminate the current backlog of substandard housing and address the units that becoming substandard by 2036. In total, it is expected that approximately 5,000 units will be in need of some level of rehabilitation during the planning period. Private and public efforts listed in the Goals and Policies section of this Housing Element describe measures aimed at stemming this tide of rehabilitation needs. The direction of the elements goals and policies include taking actions such as supporting code enforcement as well as recognizing the critical role of new development and increase land values that will spur new investments and property improvements. Housing Resources Meeting the needs and vision for housing in the City of Bremerton is predicated by a shared understanding and commitment between all interested parties, including residents, public officials, non- profit organizations, and private developers. Housing resources, from tax credits for new market affordable high density projects to federal housing vouchers administered locally, require continual coordination and education. While endorsing the Countywide Consolidated Plan and its objectives regarding shared public housing strategies, this Element works to elevate the housing issues and opportunities among federal, state, and county resources. There are two housing authorities located in Kitsap County, The Bremerton Housing Authority and Housing Kitsap. Together with Kitsap County and the City of Bremerton they help meet the housing needs of low income households in our community. The following narrative information was provided by both housing authorities. Table HSA -11 Public Housing by Program Type Certificate Mod- Public Vouchers Rehab Housing Total Project Tenant Special Purpose Voucher -based -based Veterans Family Disabled* Affairs Unification Supportive Program Housing # of units 0 0 179 1,831 197 1,603 31 0 0 vouchers in use *includes Non -Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One -Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition The total number of families on the Housing Kitsap waiting lists for Public Housing are: • 1 -Bedroom — 84 Families • 2 -Bedroom — 217 Families • 3 -Bedroom — 122 Families • 4 -Bedroom — 34 Families. • HCV — 98 Families (waiting list is opening during the summer of 2015) There are all types of families on the Housing Kitsap Public Housing and Housing Choice Voucher waiting lists; however, the largest number of applicants are elderly and/or disabled families looking for Housing Choice Vouchers, 2 bedroom fully accessible units and 1 bedroom units. Bremerton Authority has 725 applicants on the Public Housing wait list (as of 4/1/2015). This list has been closed since 7/2011. The number of applicants on the Section 8 tenant -based rental assistance program is 357 (as of 4/1/2015). This list was opened for a two-week period in March 2015 and a lottery system was used to add 300 names to the list. A total of 3,170 applications were received. It is expected that the Section 8 tenant -based list will be reopened in mid -2016 for another lottery placement of 300 names. Both wait lists (public housing and Section 8 tenant -based rental assistance programs) contain a wide range of household sizes, from elderly/disabled one-person households to families with 4 or more children. The most immediate needs are increases in the supply of rental units and housing subsidies so that those on wait lists do not languish for years waiting for assistance. The City of Bremerton has a wide variety of non-profit and government agencies working together to address our community's most pressing needs. Kitsap Continuum of Care Coalition is actively meeting, planning and working to address homeless. Our county has fully implemented Health Management Information System (HMIS) and conducts an annual Point in Time Count. The Homeless Housing Plan is being updated in 2015 and there are groups working on veterans homelessness and chronic homeless on the streets. The City of Bremerton homeless response system is coordinated through the Kitsap Continuum of Care Coalition, comprised of 40+ organizations providing prevention rental assistance, emergency shelter beds, transitional housing units, rapid rehousing subsidies, and permanent supportive housing units in tandem with a wide range of progressive engagement case management and tailored supports. Kitsap's coordinated entry program, the Housing Solutions Center, provides intake, assessment, and referrals for all households experiencing housing instability and homelessness. The Housing Solutions Center refers households to appropriate emergency housing resources and maintains a community -wide waiting list for emergency housing. Chronically homeless individuals are currently under -served in Kitsap, with few programs targeting their needs. Kitsap Community Resources provides a wide range of social services, including housing and supports, for homeless families. Veterans receive prevention funding through the Kitsap Veterans Assistance Fund, and rental assistance and case management through the Veterans Assistance and Supportive Housing (VASH) voucher and the Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF) program. The Coffee Oasis provides a wide array of services for unaccompanied homeless and street -oriented youth, drop-in centers, case management, job training, and a youth shelter. Despite great improvements in provision of housing and services to people experiencing homelessness, and a vastly improved capacity over the last 10 years, specific barriers and gaps to our community's capacity to assist all people who are homelessness have been identified. These barriers and gaps are the underlying causes of Kitsap's inability to meet the needs of all homeless residents at this time. They include: • Insufficient funding • Increased demand • Limited capacity— both in housing stock and services, and in providers' ability to expand service provision Public and Assisted Housing Opportunities Over the last 8 years Bremerton Housing Authority (BHA) has transformed its inventory of public housing units. In 2007, BHA had two public housing developments, West Park (581 units) and Tara Heights (21 units). In 2008, BHA received a HUD HOPE VI Public Housing Revitalization grant and began the transformation of West Park into Bay Vista, a new mixed -income, mixed-use, mixed -housing type neighborhood. All 581 public housing units at West Park were demolished with HUD approval in 2008- 09 and new replacement public housing was built in on-site (The Summit, 83 units total / 47 public housing; Bay Vista West, 69 units total / 54 public housing; and Bay Vista South, 68 units total / 41 public housing). In addition, as part of the revitalization plan, BHA acquired and renovated two additional off- site properties in east Bremerton (Winfield Apartments, 22 units all public housing; and Shadow Creek Apartments, 32 units / 15 public housing). The revitalization plan for West Park resulted in a reduction in public housing units from 581 to 179, but an increase in total affordable units from 581 to 624 (a combination of replacement public housing, tenant protection Housing Choice Vouchers, Low Income Housing Tax Credit units, project -based Section 8 vouchers, Section 202 project -based rental assistance, and first-time homebuyer assistance). In 2014, BHA completed a HUD Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) conversion of the 21 -unit Tara Heights development from public housing to project -based Section 8 rental assistance. All units remain affordable with no net loss in inventory available to lower-income households. As a result of the revitalization plan of West Park, BHA's inventory of public housing units are either new or completely renovated within the last 5 years. Table HAS - 13 Public Housing Condition Similar to Washington State as a whole, Bremerton has a number of assisted units at risk of being lost due to expiring contracts which keep them affordable. In Kitsap County 833 units funded through HUD Section 8 and USDA Section 515 are at risk of loss by 2017 (source: State of WA Housing Needs Assessment, Jan. 2015). It is possible over the next five year period that rental housing properties with expired affordability contracts will be sold and converted to market rate rental units, if there is a lack of funding to keep them subsidized. When rental income is insufficient to cover the maintenance and operation of housing, owners are left with two choices; raise rents to cover expenses or reduce maintenance and operating costs which eventually results in dilapidated properties. Special Needs Housing Opportunities Special needs populations are another important demographic to consider in assessing the quality and efficacy of Bremerton's housing stock. Special needs populations include the elderly, people living with mental, physical, and/or developmental disabilities, people with alcohol or other drug addiction, people living with HIV/AIDS, victims of domestic violence and people who have been discharged from institutions such as jail or prison, State Mental Hospital or the foster care system. This population represents the majority of Kitsap County's most vulnerable people. Community public services needs such as food programs, childcare, poor and homeless case management and employment skills training are some of the services that support vulnerable populations. In general, there is a high quality to the supportive services provided to populations with special needs throughout Kitsap County. However, overall federal and state funding for most services has decreased or not been renewed during the past decade. Finally, the increasing cost of permanent housing severely challenges the low-income majority within Bremerton, as well as the special needs and homeless populations. Facilities are available in Bremerton and throughout the county to provide supportive housing for the elderly and frail elderly. Facilities cover a broad range: adult family homes for 2-6 adults, Section 8 construction, assisted living, convalescence, and a range of personal care and services. In addition, services provided throughout the county aim to forestall homelessness of the elderly by providing services that help the elderly to remain in their existing housing. Paratransit provides transportation to and from Medicaid covered medical services to anyone who receives medical assistance through DSHS. Kitsap Transit Access also provides transportation to the elderly and disabled persons who are unable to use the fixed route transit system and meet specific criteria. However, the service has been significantly reduced as the result of legislation that reduced transportation funding. Some individuals with special needs, such as the disabled, have very little income and may never be fully self-sufficient. They do not have the ability to work full-time and many live on very minimal amounts of Social Security. Because of the disparity between Supplemental Security Income (SSI) income and rental housing costs, non -elderly adults with significant disabilities are often forced to choose between homelessness or placement in a segregated and restrictive institutional setting such as an adult care home, nursing home, or other congregate setting. About 8.3 million individuals nationwide receive Supplemental Security Income (SSI) because they are elderly, blind, or disabled, and are not fully covered by Social Security. They are among the nation's poorest citizens. The maximum federal monthly SSI payment for an individual is $733 in 2015. On this income, an SSI recipient can afford rent of only $220 per month (Source: National Low Income Housing Coalition, Out of Reach 2015). Other special needs populations may require support initially, but with a little assistance and housing, are able to go on to become self-sufficient. Because special needs populations are often very low- income, affordable housing is significant issue and often the reason for homelessness and instability. The combination of lack of income with other housing barriers such as poor credit, criminal history, and poor rental history, means that even some subsidized housing is not available to them. Bremerton will continue to experience a growing population of residents over the age of 60. The City of Bremerton has a higher percentage of disabled individuals when compared to other areas of the county. Seniors over the age of 65 make up 38% of the disabled population in the county. The major causes for disability in the U.S. are changing from medical to social and behaviorally -related conditions, increasingly involving complications such as substance abuse, violence, and poor mental health. In Kitsap County between July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013, 613 or 41.6% of the individuals admitted to publically funded treatment reported having a disability; 20.2% had a mental/psychological disability, 8.3% had ADHD/ADD, the remaining included cognitive impairment, hearing, learning, mobility, speech and vision impairments (Source: Kitsap County Strategic Plan for Substance Abuse, Dept. of Human Services, 2014-2016.) As the population ages, particularly the baby boom generation, there has been an increase in drug use by older adults. This combined with different cultural norms and general attitudes about drug use, and increases in the availability of psychotherapeutic medications, will likely increase substance use problems in this population. Substance abuse among those 60 years and older (including misuse of prescription drugs) currently affects about 17% of this population. By 2020, the number of older adults with substance abuse problems is expected to double. In Kitsap County between 2007 and 2013, admission for individuals age 55+ admitted to publically funded treatment rose from 18% to 27%, Bremerton can assume similar trends (Source: Kitsap County Strategic Plan for Substance Abuse, Dept. of Human Services, 2014-2016). Kitsap Mental Health Services provides mental health evaluations and services for homeless individuals; in partnership with Bremerton Housing Authority, it also provides permanent supportive housing for individuals needing long-term mental health supports. Agape unlimited and West Sound Treatment Center provide substance abuse disorder treatment, transitional housing, and sober supported housing for homeless individuals needing these services. Employment services are provided through WorkSource, a division of the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, and the Compass Vocational Program, which is tailored to serve homeless individuals residing in emergency shelters and transitional housing. Temporary and Transitional Housing Opportunities The homeless response system includes a network of shelter operators that include emergency housing beds for women and children, single men, and families with children. Couples, families with teen-age boys, households with pets, and men with children are currently under served. As quickly as possible, households are moved from emergency shelter into rapid rehousing programs (short shallow subsidies with progressive engagement case management), permanent subsidized housing, long-term housing with specific supports (such as substance abuse disorder recovery) or permanent supportive housing. However, insufficient funding for rapid rehousing and a shortage of units of affordable housing, housing with supports, and permanent supportive housing results in longer shelter stays and households who stay homeless for longer. Homeless youth are served by a spectrum of services, supports, and housing provided through the Coffee Oasis. These programs include outreach to street -oriented youth, youth drop-in locations, case management for homeless and at -risk youth, job training for youth, and emergency shelter beds for youth and young adults. At this time there are few services available for chronically homeless individuals and/or individuals with complex and multiple barriers to stable housing. The Challenge to End Veteran Homelessness in Kitsap is part of a national initiative to end veteran homelessness as quickly as possible. It includes participation from a wide range of programs specific to veterans and programs that serve all individuals experiencing homelessness. Recently a Supportive Services for Veteran Families grant has expanded the resources available for providing rental assistance and case management to veteran households. In the County, Building 9 at Retsil provides 60 beds of transitional housing for veterans throughout the region. Future Housing Projections Evaluating local housing needs requires multiple levels of analysis from numerous perspectives. It is meant to be an on-going charge to the city and to housing organizations and cannot be fully accomplished in one snapshot in time or in a rigid housing plan. Demographics, studied over time from the local to the national level, is a conventional approach to an examination of the housing market. National trends, for example, suggest continued and significant growth in the number of single households (non -married without children), seniors (65 years and older households) and single -parent headed households. The particular housing needs and characteristics of these demographics, including a smaller household size, challenge the predominance of suburban -style single-family detached housing units in the current housing market. While household size nationwide continues to decrease, a significant subset of the nation's minority population shows consistently higher household sizes with different housing expectations. Demographic data taken from U.S Census, described in Current Conditions above help profile the City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, and the State of Washington. Population and household size are key factors used to estimate the number of new housing units which will be needed during the next twenty year period. Income and age information, described above in occupancy and affordability section above, help identify the types of housing and physical improvement which will be in demand. The focus of this Comprehensive Plan, however, is on enticing new growth to the city which capitalizes on Bremerton's unique location and access in the region as well as its metropolitan characteristic, unique in Kitsap County. Existing demographics, household sizes, and incomes are instructive for gauging the existing market but, as detailed above, current data highlight approaching changes in the market. This Plan endeavors not only to address long-standing issues regarding housing, but to attract new kinds of housing and opportunities. The Centers Concept, central to this Comprehensive Plan, form the basis for this approach. It is found in the Land Use Element but repeated below as it provides the destination point that the goals and policies are designed to assist the community in reaching. Calculation of Future Residential Land Need The population projections employed in this plan anticipate that the 14,000 new persons expected in the community by 2036, will live in a variety of single family households and multifamily settings. The table below is derived from data in the Kitsap County Buildable Lands Analysis 2014 and illustrates the historic trends in this arena. Table HSA— 14 Bremerton 2006-2012 Single Family Permits Source: Kitsap County Buildable Lands Report, 2014 The tables presents the past — a historical backdrop. While the past certainly influences the future, the goals and policies in this plan represent an attempt by the community to move to a new paradigm. In general, that change is focused on providing a moderate increase in the proportion of future housing opportunity in higher density types. The majority of these opportunities will occur in mixed use centers. In addition to this emphasis, the Plan's community goals and policies also indicate a desire to increase density in existing neighborhoods —both by encouraging smaller lots in new subdivisions, and also by encouraging infill of vacant existing properties. The net result, never -the -less will be small increase in overall density in traditional neighborhoods as well. Zoning Count of New Dwelling Acres Density Applications Units (dwelling units/acre) Applied under SF -2 2 2 0.59 3.39 1988 Comp SF -3 3 _3 0.52 5.77 Plan MF 4 4 0.5 g Applied under CCR 1 1 0.23 4.35 the 2004 FC 11 2.08 0.48 Comp Plan NCC 3 3 0.34 8.82 LDR 297 297 59.66 4.98 BVSAP 41 41 3.58 11.45 Grand Total 352 352 67.6 Table HSA— 15 Bremerton 2006-2012 Multifamily Permits Source: Kitsap County Buildable Lands Report, 2014 Zoning Count of New Dwelling Acres Density (dwelling Applications Units units/acre) DR_ 2 60.57 10.53 MR 1 _ 3 0.14 21.43 BVSAP 31 202 6.3 32.06 Grand Total 34 211 7.01 The tables presents the past — a historical backdrop. While the past certainly influences the future, the goals and policies in this plan represent an attempt by the community to move to a new paradigm. In general, that change is focused on providing a moderate increase in the proportion of future housing opportunity in higher density types. The majority of these opportunities will occur in mixed use centers. In addition to this emphasis, the Plan's community goals and policies also indicate a desire to increase density in existing neighborhoods —both by encouraging smaller lots in new subdivisions, and also by encouraging infill of vacant existing properties. The net result, never -the -less will be small increase in overall density in traditional neighborhoods as well. The following table provides calculation of residential land need to accommodate the City of Bremerton's population growth forecast over the twenty year planning period — approximately 14,000 persons. The table is based for four categories of residential uses. Because the new framework introduced by this Plan results in some new housing environments, these categories are not the same as those for which the historical data depicted. However, if the assumption is made that 30% of the housing units in the "centers SF + MF" (single family and multifamily residential uses in centers combined) category are single family uses and 70% multifamily, it is possible to estimate that more than 50% of the new housing units anticipated by this calculation are in single family types. It is important to note that even within a model that places nearly 60% of new housing units in centers (and nearly 58% of new population) an overall emphasis on single family housing types remains. In fact, the actual proportion of SF types increases over the historic pattern depicted by the data in the previous Tables. This is consistent with community goals and policies calling for increased home ownership and supporting traditional neighborhoods, while it also addresses the community's desire to create a new urban experience and living environment - the ability to choose to live in the new mixed-use centers. Tanle HAS — 16 Future Residential Land Need Type Density Net acres Household Household Population (du/ac) needed Size Low High Low High Low High Low High Neighborhood SF 4 6 333 562 2,000 2,250 2.8 4,000 4,500 Non -center MF 8 18 28 94 500 750 2.0 1,000 1,500 Center SF + MF 20 20 113 125 2,250 2,500 2.4 5,000 6,000 DT Center MF 40 40 19 25 750 1,000 2.0 1,500 2,000 Total 5,500 6,500 Total Pop 11,500 14,000 Centers Population (lines 3 &4) 6,500 8,000 The result of the table above is a calculation of net acres needed in the four residential housing categories used. In other words, the figures for the land are needed to site the houses and apartments needed along with their related on-site improvements. However, to calculate the number of gross acres needed for residential development, allowances must be made for the proportion of land area that will be consumed by roads and streets, and portions of land that are not developable due to the existence of environmental constraints — so-called "critical areas". In Bremerton those proportions have been found to be approximately 20% for land infrastructure constraints and 12% for an average of "critical areas". Therefore, the gross land area needed for residential uses is larger than the net area by a factor of approximately 32%. This document proceeds under the assumption that the actual residential land need is as shown on the following table. Residential Land Supply In Sum, the calculations discussed in the Land Use Appendix demonstrate that there is sufficient capacity in on existing lands throughout the City to accommodate the expected increase in population assigned to those areas. It is known that there is a high amount of excess capacity available in centers that would be able to accept additional residential growth and the centers would to also provide needed services. Glossary The following definitions have been derived from state law and coordinated countywide policy planning: a. Below Market Rate Housing shall mean housing intended for low -to -middle income households. Below -Market Rate Housing is a result of a concerted effort to provide housing for people who can not afford market rates, often achieved through public strategies and subsidies. Qualifying income levels are further defined as follows (WAC 365.195): i.Extremely low-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are at or below 30% of the countywide median. ii.Very low-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are within the range of 31 - 50% of the countywide median. iii.Low-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are within the range of 51 - 80% of the countywide median. iv.Moderate-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are within the range 81-95% of the countywide median. v.Middle-income shall mean those households that have incomes that are within the range of 96-120% of the countywide median. b. Market Rate Housing shall mean housing intended for households with incomes that are greater than 120% of the countywide median. c. Affordable Housing shall include both below-market and market rate housing. It represents a diverse spectrum of housing choices that supports a diverse population. Affordable housing choices represent housing costs that are 30% or less of all the various household income levels, throughout the city. Table of Contents Inventory ofthe Local and Regional Economy ......................................................... EDAppendix-3 KitaapCounty Regional Economy ......................................................................... EDAppendix-4 Naval Base Kitaap.................................................................................................. EDAppendix-5 City Profile The City of Bremerton is the largest city in Kitsap County, only 11 miles across the water from Seattle and just 33 miles northwest of Tacoma off State Highway 16. The Washington State Ferry system conveniently links downtown Bremerton to downtown Seattle, providing unobstructed automobile access, a unique feature, in comparison to other satellite cities around Seattle. State highways tie Bremerton and Port of Bremerton facilities (including the Bremerton National Airport), to Tacoma on the south, and to the Hood Canal Bridge on the north, Puget Sound's link to the Olympic Peninsula. The table below compares Bremerton statistics with Kitsap County and Washington State. Table EC -1 Bremerton Statistics, Compared with Kitsap County, State of WA Bremerton Kitsap County Washington State Population, 2014 Estimate 38,572 254,183 7,061,530 Population, 2010 37,729 251,133 6,724,540 Land Area (square miles) 28.41 395 66,456 Persons per square mile 1,328 636 101 Median age of population 31.9 39.4 37.3 Median Household Income 43,183 62,413 59,478 Total Housing Units 17,273 109,327 2,963,141 Individuals Below Poverty Level 20.4% 10.4% 13.4% Number of Companies 2450 5567 175,553 Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2010, American Community Survey The following table shows the net total businesses with active City of Bremerton business licenses since 2006. This number reflects annual changes due to closing of businesses and new licenses. Table EC -2 Active Business Licenses — City of Bremerton Year 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Number of Res facturing (public 5,253 5,503 5,390 5,300 5,296 4,569 4,536 4,454 4,356 Business Licenses 452 590 705 1,819 8,955 639 13,667 1,788 28,614 Source: City of Bremerton Financial Services — Tax and License Division Inventory of the Local and Regional Economy The Puget Sound Regional Council publishes summaries based on data from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, which is reported by employers to the Washington State Employment Security Department. PSRC uses data from March, which is a representative month with minimal seasonal fluctuations. The data in the following table indicates number of jobs (vs. FTEs). Bremerton has the largest number of jobs compared to the other incorporated cities within Kitsap County. Table EC -3 2014 PSRC COVERED EMPLOYMENT ESTIMATES Constr/ FIRE' Manu- Retail Service WTUZ Gov't Education Total Res facturing (public sector) Bremerton 452 590 705 1,819 8,955 639 13,667 1,788 28,614 Bainbridge 324 250 421 677 3,526 293 741 613 6,845 Island Port Orchard 182 219 98 1,523 2,987 521 1,353 452 7,336 Poulsbo 125 355 65 1,218 2,967 115 308 555 5,707 Unincorporated 2,538 1,071 826 4,459 13,317 889 6,209 3,159 32,469 Kitsap County 1 Finance, Insurance, Real Estate 2 Wholesale trade, Transportation, and Utilities Kitsap County Regional Economy Bremerton is included in the Kitsap County region covered by the Kitsap Economic Development Alliance (KEDA), a public/private nonprofit partnership focused on attracting and retaining businesses in the Kitsap region. Kitsap County ranks high in what KEDA calls essential economic development indicators. These indicators include educational attainment and skilled work force; development of intellectual property; per capita economic output; and median household incomes. Kitsap has the advantage of multi -modal access to wider business markets (Seattle, Tacoma) — close proximity to rail, deep water ports, airfields, and the interstate highway system with uncongested traffic areas. Kitsap is a recognized leader in several key regional economic indicators: maritime; military; manufacturing; health care; technology; and tourism. Kitsap is also home to the most -dense concentration of engineering talent in the Seattle region'. KEDA defines 'Large Establishments' as businesses with 20 or more employees. In 2013, the Kitsap Region had a total of 352 Large Establishments. The following table shows the major industries in the Kitsap Region, number of employees in each industry, and shows each industry's share of the total by percentage. Table EC -4 Business Major Industries Summary — Kitsap County Major Industry # Employees % Establishments Services 42,280 40.3 5,169 Public Administration 30,166 28.8 198 Retail Trade 14,689 14.0 1,673 Construction 4,040 3.8 938 Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 4,020 3.8 836 Manufacturing 3,738 3.5 380 Transportation/Communications 2,906 2.7 387 Wholesale Trade 1,608 1.5 401 Ag/Forestry/Fishing 1,144 1.0 298 Mining 96 0.0 6 Source: KEDA 2013 1 Kitsap Economic Development Alliance (KEDA), 2015, http://kitsapeda.org/demographics/workforce/ Naval Base Kitsap Naval Base Kitsap is a large military installation with discrete geographic locations within Kitsap County. It greatly impacts Bremerton and the county as a whole. Naval Base Kitsap is comprised of multiple facilities and locations, including NBK-Bremerton, NBK-Bangor, NBK-Keyport, the Dabob Bay Range Complex, Jackson Park housing complex, Manchester Fuel Depot, and the Navy Railroad. Naval Base Kitsap provides base support to dozens of military and civilian commands with combined annual payrolls of approximately $2.3 billion. Protection of the integrity of this base is critical to national security and the region's economy. Both Military and civilian personnel contribute to the local economy. Spending generates local business revenues, which supports additional jobs and wages, as well as sales and business and occupation (B&O) taxes for the state, county and local municipalities. A substantial portion of employment in Kitsap County is related to the federal government (i.e. DOD), with many of those jobs located in Bremerton. • 14,600 of 22,400 government jobs in the county are located in Bremerton. • Naval Base Kitsap provides base operations support for Military and Civilian Commands that employ roughly 14,000 + civilian personnel, up from a reported 13,661 in 2011, according to the PSRC. • 65 percent of federal employees in Kitsap County are employed by the United States Navy. • More recently (2014-2015), hiring at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility in Bremerton resulted in approximately 1,800 additional jobs Transportation Contents Transportation Introduction......................................................................................................T Appendix -4 Conditions and Trends...............................................................................................................T Appendix -5 Land Uses and Key Destinations............................................................................................T Appendix -5 Downtown Bremerton.......................................................................................................T Appendix -6 Kitsap Conference Center..................................................................................................T Appendix -6 Bremerton Transportation Center & Ferry Terminal.........................................................T Appendix -6 Schools...............................................................................................................................T Appendix -6 OlympicCollege.................................................................................................................T Appendix -7 Parks and Recreation Areas...............................................................................................T Appendix -7 NavalBase Kitsap...............................................................................................................TAppendix-8 Transportation Network......................................................................................................T Appendix -10 Existing Pedestrian Facilities............................................................................................T Appendix -13 Existing Bicycle Facilities..................................................................................................T Appendix -14 Kayaking...........................................................................................................................T Appendix -16 PublicTransit....................................................................................................................T Appendix -17 Freight and Aviation.........................................................................................................T Appendix -21 MotorVehicles.................................................................................................................T Appendix -23 Opportunities and Challenges..............................................................................................T Appendix -25 Network Connectivity......................................................................................................T Appendix -25 RegionalGrowth..............................................................................................................T Appendix -26 Puget Sound Industrial Center(PSIC)...............................................................................T Appendix -26 Safe Routes for All, Especially Pedestrians and Bicycles..................................................T Appendix -27 Downtown Circulation.....................................................................................................T Appendix -31 Community Outreach...............................................................................................................T Appendix -33 Stakeholder Meeting............................................................................................................T Appendix -33 PublicMeeting.....................................................................................................................T Appendix -34 Introduction to the Layered Network..................................................................................T Appendix -35 ModalNetworks...................................................................................................................T Appendix -36 Pedestrian........................................................................................................................T Appendix -36 Bicycling...........................................................................................................................T Appendix -37 Transit..............................................................................................................................T Appendix -40 Freightand Auto..............................................................................................................T Appendix -41 Modesplit targets................................................................................................................T Appendix -42 Overview of Costs and Revenues.........................................................................................T Appendix -54 PSIC-Bremerton....................................................................................................................T Appendix -55 Setting Priorities...................................................................................................................T Appendix -58 Monitoring and Evaluation..................................................................................................T Appendix -58 Bi -Annual Mobility Report Card...........................................................................................T Appendix -59 Figures Figure 1: Key Destinations.........................................................................................................T Appendix -9 Figure 2: Commute Mode to Work in Bremerton...................................................................T Appendix -10 Figure 3: Roadway Classifications............................................................................................T Appendix -12 Figure 4: Examples of Existing Pedestrian Facilities.................................................................T Appendix -13 Figure 5: Examples of Existing Bicycle Facilities.......................................................................T Appendix -14 Figure 6: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities..................................................................T Appendix -15 Figure 7: Kitsap Peninsula Water Trails Map...........................................................................T Appendix -16 Figure 8: Existing Transit Service..............................................................................................T Appendix -18 Figure 9: Active Transportation...............................................................................................T Appendix -20 Figure 10: Existing WSDOT and City Truck Routes...................................................................T Appendix -22 Figure 11: Auto Level of Service...............................................................................................T Appendix -24 Figure 12: Collisions.................................................................................................................T Appendix -28 Figure 13: Severity of Accidents...............................................................................................T Appendix -29 Figure 14: Bicycle and Pedestrian Collisions............................................................................T Appendix -30 Figure 15: Greatest Impacts to Travel......................................................................................T Appendix -34 Figure 16: Priorities for Funding..............................................................................................T Appendix -34 Figure 17: Layered Network Concept......................................................................................T Appendix -35 Figure 18: Pedestrian Priority Network...................................................................................T Appendix -38 Figure 19: Bicycle Priority Network..........................................................................................T Appendix -39 Figure 20: Pedestrian Facilities................................................................................................T Appendix -51 Figure 21: Bicycle Facilities......................................................................................................T Appendix -52 Figure 22: Twenty Year Auto Projects......................................................................................T Appendix -53 Tables Table 1: Roadway Classifications.............................................................................................T Appendix -11 Table 2: Level of Service Definitions........................................................................................T Appendix -23 Table 3: Stakeholder Input.......................................................................................................T Appendix -33 Table 4: Pedestrian Accommodation- Sidewalk Provision.......................................................T Appendix -36 Table 5: Bicycle Accommodation- Facility Descriptions...........................................................T Appendix -37 Table 6: Transit Accommodation- Stop Amenities and Pedestrian Access .............................T Appendix -40 Table 7: Mode Split Targets for Regional Growth Centers in Bremerton................................T Appendix -42 Table 8: Twenty Year Project List.............................................................................................T Appendix -44 Table 9: Costs of Bremerton Transportation Plan (20+years).................................................T Appendix -54 Transportation Introduction Bremerton is a city rich in history and beauty. Over the past century, Bremerton has continued to grow into an attractive waterfront community on the shores of Puget Sound. This Transportation Appendix aims to provide a 20 - year vision for Bremerton's transportation system, which respects the community's history and character, supports anticipated growth in the region, and builds on Bremerton's momentum as an attractive community in which to live, work, and play by supporting safe and comfortable travel by all modes through 2036. The overall vision for Bremerton's Transportation Plan is to promote, manage, and maintain a safe, efficient, and integrated multimodal transportation system that is consistent with the City's overall vision and adequately serves anticipated growth. Guidance from City staff, the Planning Commission, stakeholders, and citizens helped identify several priorities: • Create an interconnected multimodal network that connects all users to City Centers and major destinations within Bremerton as well as Kitsap County • Improve safety for all users through updated facilities and street designs that accommodate all modes • Coordinate with local and regional partners to ensure that travel patterns do not disproportionately impact Bremerton residents' quality of life • Increase transportation spending on maintaining, preserving, and operating the existing transportation system The Transportation Plan sets a framework for understanding, prioritizing, measuring, and creating a transportation network to help Bremerton achieve its vision. This document includes five sections: • Section 1— Conditions and Trends: Describes conditions for all travel modes in the existing transportation system. This section also identifies current challenges and trends that will affect Bremerton's transportation network in the future. • Section 2 — Community Outreach: Describes the public outreach process conducted with community stakeholders and members, as well as specific feedback received from community members. • Section 3 — Future Transportation Vision: Introduces a layered network concept that forms the foundation of this plan to accommodate all modes of travel and create a complete transportation network in Bremerton. This section also details how to accommodate each travel mode and establishes the City's level of service standards. • Section 4 —Transportation Projects: Provides a long-term capital plan based on the community values expressed in the transportation goals and layered network. • Section 5 — Implementing the Transportation Plan: Evaluates Bremerton's financial conditions over the next 20 years and provides guidance on plan implementation. To serve as a useful document for the community, including both City staff and the public, this Transportation Appendix focuses on the City's vision and the projects and programs intended to meet that vision. Conditions and Trends This section describes how people use Bremerton's transportation network today, as well as how that may change over the next 20 years as the region grows. The way people travel is greatly influenced by the built environment, which includes land use and travel corridors; it also includes the key destinations people travel to, such as where they live, work, play, shop, and recreate, and an understanding of how people are traveling based on anticipated travel growth and travel mode data. Land Uses and Key Destinations The places where people live, work, and play are impacted by how a city and surrounding communities guide where development occurs The Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan provides the guidance mentioned here. One way a city can influence this is through zoning. Zoning allows a city to encourage specific development, such as homes and businesses, to occur in targeted areas of the city. It is important to consider land use when planning for transportation because it provides insight into areas where more people may concentrate their travel. The City of Bremerton also endorses the "Centers Concept", which is described in detail in the Land Use Chapter of this Plan. In general, a Center is a mixed-use area. It places residences, basic services for residents, employment opportunities, and amenities such as public spaces and parks, in a well-designed 1 PSRC. 2013. "Regional Centers Monitoring Report' http://www.psrc.org/assets/268/rgc-profile-Bremerton.pdf area. Centers plan for growth in the most efficient manner possible. Centers also support easier access to jobs and transportation, urban amenities, and a pedestrian -friendly environment with walking access to basic services. The commercial areas in Bremerton, where people commonly shop, are located downtown, within the East Bremerton area, and west of SR 3; these areas are zoned for commercial and residential uses and can be seen in the Land Use Chapter. Downtown and East Bremerton are linked by the Manette Bridge, with properties within these areas zoned by the Downtown Regional Center and Manette Neighborhood Center. The intent of centers is to focus commercial, entertainment, cultural, civic uses, and urban residential into an active compact, walkable area served by public transit. Other areas of commercial and industrial land use are located in the western portions of the City along Burwell Street, 6th Avenue, and Kitsap Way. Much of the remaining City area is zoned for single-family residential, multi -family residential, institutions, and the military. Parking is also a major land use in Bremerton'. Key destinations, areas of the City where people typically concentrate their travel to and from, and the Bremerton Centers are summarized in Figure 1. Downtown Bremerton Downtown Bremerton, located on Washington Avenue next to the Ferry Terminal, is a major trip generator in Bremerton. Within the district locals and visitors alike, explore public parks, fountains and art along Bremerton's waterfront, while enjoying the district's restaurants, museums, shops and tourist attractions. The downtown area also features community events such as the Bremerton Farmer's Market at Evergreen Rotary Park. Kitsap Conference Center Just a short ferry ride from Seattle, the Kitsap Conference Center provides a 15,000 square foot venue for meetings, conferences, trade shows, social events, reunions, and weddings along one of Bremerton's prime waterfront locations. Over the years, countless conferences and events have been located at this waterfront location drawing visitors from the region and nation. Bremerton Transportation Center & Ferry Terminal Located in downtown, the Bremerton Transportation Center and Ferry Terminal provide connections to key local and regional destinations. Seven Kitsap Transit bus routes and one Mason Transit bus route serve the Transportation Center. The Ferry Terminal is served by the Washington State Ferries, with connections to Seattle, and Kitsap Transit, with passenger only connections to Port Orchard and Annapolis. Both The Bremerton Transportation Center and Ferry Terminal create high levels of ' Bremerton School District. 2015. "About our District" http://www.bremertonschools.org/domain/51 multimodal activity, especially during peak commute travel times. Schools The Bremerton School District operates neighborhood schools that serve approximately 5,000 students within the City and surrounding areas'. The District consists of: • Crownhill Elementary • Armin Jahr Elementary • Kitsap Lake Elementary • View Ridge Elementary • Naval Avenue Early Learning Center • West Hills Stem Academy • Mountain View Middle School • Bremerton High School • Renaissance High School The City of Bremerton, the Bremerton School District, and neighborhood groups, have made a commitment to provide safe access to the City's schools by establishing a State Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program. Currently, the Bremerton School District has an established set of safe walking routes for Armin Jahr Elementary School, Crownhill Elementary School, Kitsap Lake Elementary School, Naval Avenue Elementary School, and West Hills Elementary School. Olympic College Olympic College is a major destination in central Bremerton, and is home to approximately 8,000 students3. In general, the pedestrian network surrounding the college is well connected by streets to the south and east side of campus, however the streets to the west are less connected and lack sidewalks in many locations. Warren Avenue serves as a major barrier between the college and residential neighborhoods, restricting walking and biking opportunities. The lack of facilities on the Warren Avenue bridge further inhibit walking and biking to the campus. Currently, there are no bike lanes on the bridge, and sidewalks are less than four feet making it difficult for pedestrians to use the facility. As a result, access to the college is primarily by car, using Warren Avenue between 13th Street and 16th Street or by Kitsap Transit Bus Route 24. Parks and Recreation Areas The City's park system consists of one regional park, three community parks, nine neighborhood parks, 10 pocket parks, four natural areas, six plazas, and five special use facilities. The City's parks and recreation areas feature ball fields, playgrounds, walking paths, water access, picnic areas, scenic views, a skate park, and a dog park. 3 Olympic College. 2015. "2014-2015 Facts and Figures" http://www.olympic.edu/about-oc/2014-2015-facts-and-figures In addition to schools and parks, the Bremerton Senior Center and various retirement communities throughout the area are major generators of non -motorized trips. Many residents of retirement communities no longer drive their own vehicles, so they are dependent on privately operated shuttles, public transportation, and walking to get to doctors' appointments, residences of friends, and shopping/dining destinations. There are approximately 10 major retirement communities in Bremerton, located in a north - south corridor roughly centered on SR 303. Naval Base Kitsap Naval Base Kitsap (NBK-Bremerton) is located on the north side of the Sinclair Inlet within the incorporated boundaries of the City of Bremerton. It hosts the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility which is Washington State's second largest industrial employer. Almost half of Bremerton's jobs are associated with the Naval Shipyard, Naval Hospital and Fleet Logistics Center. NBK- Bremerton employers create a high level of multimodal transportation demand. Currently, heavy congestion exists on corridors leading to NBK-Bremerton during the weekday morning and afternoon peak hours, especially along Burwell Street. In the future, Commands located on Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton are expected to see increased employment, which will further stress the transportation system surrounding the base. Puget Sound Industrial Center (PSIC- Bremerton) PSIC-Bremerton, formally known as South Kitsap Industrial Area (SKIA), is a key regional growth center and destination. It contains a mix of industrial and commercial businesses, including the Bremerton National Airport and the Olympic View Industrial Park. The roadway network within and surrounding PSIC- Bremerton consists of SR 3 (a principal north/south roadway on the Kitsap Peninsula), SR 16 (a major freeway that connects Bremerton with Tacoma), and several two-lane county roads. Currently, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian systems are limited within PSIC- Bremerton. 4w Ab'41 xvmmoN �JAV XHiVd Transportation Network Bremerton's transportation network accommodates many modes of travel, including walking, bicycling, public transit, and driving. Vehicular travel is still the primary choice for most travelers in and around Bremerton, as shown in the American Community Survey data in Figure 2. The City has made significant investments in creating a walkable downtown. Nevertheless, city streets form the foundation of the transportation framework with roadways shaping how residents and visitors experience Bremerton. The main travel corridors in Bremerton are mostly roadways with sidewalks, but also include some trails and bus routes. The downtown portion of Bremerton, roughly between Washington Avenue and Warren Avenue along 1st through 6th Streets has a relatively well-connected street grid. The northern and western portions of the city are characterized by larger blocks and curvilinear streets, which can make direct connections more difficult. This plan classifies Bremerton's roadways into major arterials, minor arterials, collectors, and local streets, as shown in Table 1 and displayed in Figure 3. Classifications for Washington State are defined and approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). There have been no changes in the roadway classifications since the previous plan, however changes to Bremerton's functional classification are being considered as part of this update. Figure 2: Commute Mode to Work in Bremerton Table 1: Roadway Classifications Principal Principal arterials serve regional through trips Burwell Street Arterial and connect Bremerton with the rest of the region. These facilities are the focus of using technology to enhance and preserve capacity for moving vehicles and freight. Increasingly, 11th Street principal arterials are used by pedestrians due to the direct connections they provide. However, in Bremerton, pedestrian facilities on principal arterials are generally outdated. Minor Arterial Minor arterials are designed for higher Naval Avenue volumes, but tend not to be major regional travel ways. Minor arterial streets provide inter -neighborhood connections. Similarly, technology to enhance and preserve capacity 6th Street are a focus. These corridors could be the focus of targeted bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Collectors Major Collectors distribute trips between local High Avenue streets and arterials and serve as transition roadways to or from commercial and residential areas. These are streets should be designed to maintain vehicular mobility at Park Avenue lower speeds to improve safety for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Local Streets These streets also distribute trips between Pleasant Avenue local streets and arterials and serve as transition roadways to or from commercial and residential areas. Minor Collectors have low volumes and can include select traffic Marion Avenue calming elements to balance experience for all modes, while also providing vehicular mobility. Existing Pedestrian Facilities Residents and visitors in Bremerton walk as a part of their daily travel for many reasons. Children attending school, commuters taking the bus or connecting with a carpool to get to work, senior citizens making midday trips, or residents walking their pets all require safe pedestrian amenities. Sidewalks, crosswalks, and curb ramps are all key features in creating a safe and welcoming environment for people to walk. Buffers between sidewalks and lanes of traffic, such as landscaping or on -street parking, can also provide some relief from traffic for pedestrians. Figure 4 shows examples of Bremerton's existing pedestrian sidewalks and amenities. The presence and conditions of sidewalks vary considerably throughout Bremerton. Sidewalks are generally available along all arterials, streets within the central business district, and in newer subdivisions. However, many older parts of the community and recently annexed areas have incomplete or older sidewalks. Sidewalk coverage and quality is also inconsistent near high priority pedestrian areas such as schools and major employers, which create challenges for children walking to school and residents commuting to work by foot or transit. In addition, critical links such as the Warren Avenue Bridge, are in need of sidewalk and ADA improvements. Without improved sidewalk conditions on the Warren Avenue Bridge it is difficult for residents to connect to key destinations such as Olympic College and East Bremerton healthcare facilities. Currently, both sidewalks along the bridge are less than four feet wide and create major challenges for pedestrians in wheelchairs, pedestrians pushing strollers, and other users to pass each other within the sidewalk. In addition, there are currently no bike facilities on the bridge making it difficult for bicyclists to use the roadway, as vehicle travel typically exceeds speeds of 45 mph. Retrofitting and developing missing links in Bremerton's sidewalk network will promote a more walkable environment in Bremerton and contribute to more trips made by walking. The ability of facilities to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements is important to the City. The City is undertaking an inventory of existing barriers to ADA mobility and access, which will be used as part of the ADA Transition Plan. Figure 4: Examples of Existing Pedestrian Facilities Existing Bicycle Facilities Bicycle facilities are an important element in the transportation network. Currently, bicycle facilities are limited to shared lane use markings and bicycle lanes on Kitsap Way, Wheaton Way, Charleston Boulevard, and Auto Center Way, as well as shared use paths and trails within city parks. Existing gaps in the bicycle network create "high stress" environments in which bicyclists must navigate through vehicle traffic or difficult arterial crossings to complete their journey. Figure 5 shows examples of Bremerton's bicycle facilities including newly constructed bike lanes on Lower Wheaton Way (top) and share the road signage on Tracyton Beach Road (bottom). Bremerton is actively working to improve conditions for bicyclists. The City recently completed several bicycle projects including the installation of sharrows on Kitsap Way between Callow Avenue and SR 3, bicycle lanes on Wheaton Way between the Manette Bridge and Lebo Boulevard, traffic calming enhancements along Washington Avenue, and bicycle lanes on Pacific Avenue between 5th Street and the Manette Bridge. The community has identified a need for an interconnected bicycle network with well- defined east -west and north -south bicycle routes as a major priority. Without adequate bicycle facilities, residents and commuters face challenges navigating the City's street network. Figure 6 shows existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities within Bremerton. Figure 5: Examples of Existing Bicycle Facilities Kayaking Waterfront communities, such as Bremerton, have a unique opportunity to provide a variety of water based transportation options. Although predominantly used for recreation, water trails are a viable transportation option to commute to work and other key destinations. The Kitsap Peninsula has more than 300 miles of shoreline, making it the second longest coastline in Washington State. The peninsula is spanned by the Kitsap Peninsula Water Trail, as well as the National Water Trails System and the Washington Water Trails Cascadia Marine Trail, which reaches from Olympia to the Canadian Border. The peninsula connects to many kayak launch points, and has the potential to link to pedestrian and land based transit systems throughout Bremerton and surrounding areas. Figure 7 shows a map of existing water trails in the Kitsap Peninsula. Figure 7: Kitsap Peninsula Water Trails Map Public Transit Public transit serves as a key component of the transportation network that connects residents with employment centers, public places and regional destinations. Many Bremerton residents and employees use public transit for trips within and outside of the City. Public transit in Bremerton consists of fixed -route bus and ferry service provided by Kitsap Transit, Mason Transit, and Washington State Ferries. Figure 8 on the following page highlights the route coverage of fixed -route bus and ferry service in Bremerton. Kitsap Transit provides local, limited, and shuttle bus transit service. The majority of transit riders access Kitsap Transit service by walking to transit from their home or by driving to a parking lot or on -street parking and then walking to connect to transit. Fourteen bus routes serve Bremerton with frequencies ranging from 20 to 60 minutes. The Bremerton Transportation Center provides access to seven of the local bus routes. Additionally, Mason Transit operates one bus route from the Bremerton Transportation Center to the City of Belfair. Currently, no Kitsap Transit routes serve PSIC-Bremerton. Kitsap Transit, Mason Transit, and the Washington State Ferries serve the Bremerton Ferry Terminal. Kitsap Transit provides passenger ferry service to Port Orchard and Annapolis, every half-hour, six days a week. In 2013, foot ferry ridership accounted for 450,732 of Kitsap Transit's total boardings4. The Washington State Ferries provides passenger and vehicular ferry service to Bremerton via the Bremerton -Seattle ferry, between 5 am to midnight. There are 15 daily ferries to Bremerton, departing every 60 to 120 minutes. Between 2013 and 2014, ridership between Bremerton and Seattle grew by approximately 10 percent, serving over 2.5 million passengers. 4 http://www.kitsaptransit.com/ uploads/pdf/board/annu aIreport 2013.pdf 0 Active Transportation Analysis Activetranoportationisanyhuman'povveredmodeoftranoportation,ouchaovva|kingand biking. Figure 9 displays areas that are attractive for active transportation in Bremerton. A description of the active transportation analysis process is provided below. Tool. To forecast areas that have higher levels of active transportation, several indices of walking and bicycling demand were evaluated. Each index was chosen based on its relationship between the built environment and travel patterns. A composite score was ther calculated to determine the relative attractiveness of one area over another for active * Estimating Active Transportation. To estimate walking and biking demand in Bremerton, eight indices were evaluated: o Proximity toattractions o Proximity toschools o Proximity toparks o Proximity to transit o Population density o Employment density o Diversity ofland use * Each index was weighted based on the strength of its relationship with walking and biking, and measured atthe census block level using spatial analysis software. Each census block was then assigned acomposite score based onhow accessible orattractive itwas for walking and biking. Analyzing the Results. Bremerton's walking and bicycling results indicate that many streets near Downtown Bremerton are especially attractive for walking and biking uses. Vital streets that serve as a link to a variety of uses and destinations scored highly, including Burwell Street, 6th Street, and Warren Avenue. This plan uses these findings as a resource to evaluate bicycle and pedestrian improvements along desire corridors. 0 m 0 CL m aj U of aj LL 00 CL 0 m 0 CL m aj U of aj LL Freight and Aviation Freight movement in Bremerton occurs primarily via the State Routes (SR) that serve the City. SR 3, SR 304, and SR 310 are identified as WSDOT Highways of Statewide Significance. SR 3 is a grade -separated freeway that travels through West Bremerton and is classified by WSDOT as a T-1 Freight Corridor. SR 304, classified as a T-3 Freight Corridor, connects Bremerton with the Bremerton Ferry Terminal to the east and SR 3 to the west, providing access to PSIC-Bremerton and other industrial uses south of Bremerton. SR 310, another T-3 corridor, is a principal arterial that serves as an east -west distributor of freight traffic within the City. In addition, both SR 303 and National Ave serve as north -south city designated truck routes. In addition to highways and city truck routes, railroads and air facilities are key elements in freight distribution. The Bremerton National Airport handles a variety of imports and exports. Because PSIC-Bremerton is a Free - Trade Zone, companies have the option of avoiding certain duties and fees if they import parts into Washington and do their final assembly there. The Bremerton National Airport, in conjunction with the freight railroad corridor that parallels the west side of SR 3, provides the opportunity to serve these industrial uses and promote the movement of materials and finished goods. Consistent with FAA and WSDOT guidance, the PSIC Subarea Plan outlines policies that ensure future land uses and development are compatible with Bremerton National Airport and the industrial The WSDOT freight corridors that serve character of the PSIC-Bremerton. Bremerton along with additional truck routes designated by the City are shown in Figure 10. OJ 3 Op LL Motor Vehicles With many Bremerton residents choosing motor vehicles as their primary mode of transportation, the City's street and roadway network is critical to the transportation system. Increased growth within the region has led to more traffic congestion along the State Routes and Bremerton's main corridors. An analysis of intersections within the city limits was performed to assess existing traffic operations and the need for future roadway improvements. Given the extensive nature of previous studies, such as the PSIC-Bremerton Subarea Plans and the SR 3/SR 304 Bremerton Interchange Improvements Study, which involved detailed LOS analysis and identified a range of projects needed to support Bremerton's transportation system, 14 intersections were selected due to their location on critical corridors within the City. Projects identified in previous studies are included in the final 20 -year project list on page 44. For this analysis, intersections were assigned a level of service (LOS) grade based on their operations in terms of vehicle delay. Table 2 describes the Level of Service definitions laid out in Chapter 16 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (Transportation Research Board, 2010), which is the methodology used for most of the intersections within the study. In a few locations, HCM 2000 was used due to limitations in applying the HCM 2010 methodology. ' Formerly known as the SKIA Subarea Plan Figure 11 on the following page summarizes the intersection LOS analysis. Detailed reports of LOS are available in the Technical Analysis. Table 2: Level of Service Definitions LOS DESCRIPTION A Free-flowing conditions. B Stable operating conditions. C Stable operating conditions, but individual motorists are affected by the interaction with other motorists. D High density of motorists, but stable flow. E Near -capacity operations, with significant delay and low speeds. F Over capacity, with delays. s The City's level of service (LOS) policy aims to develop a transportation system that achieves a level of service (LOS) that balances multimodal needs and mobility. The City will maintain a LOS E or better (V/C less than or equal to 1.0) throughout the City; except along SR 310, which is a Highway of Statewide Significance (HSS) route. All intersections analyzed meet the City's current level of service (LOS) standards. However, the following intersections are close to exceeding the acceptable maximum vehicle delay of the standards: • Warren Avenue (SR 303) and 6th Street - (LOS D approaching LOS E) • Warren Avenue (SR 303) and 11th Street - (LOS D approaching LOS E) These intersections are located along key east - west and north -south corridors. SR 303 is a three to four -lane principal arterial road, which extends from Burwell Street (SR 304) in Bremerton to Waaga Way (SR 3/SR 303) at its northern terminus in Silverdale. Opportunities and Challenges The City of Bremerton has several important challenges to face as it prepares for future growth and the development of its downtown core, city centers, and PSIC-Bremerton. Motor vehicle travel dominates the City's transportation framework and contributes to congestion in Bremerton, especially during peak commute hours. Bremerton is working to create a more vibrant community that promotes an integrated multimodal transportation system, which will be key to addressing the transportation challenges within the city. Network Connectivity The Bremerton Transportation Center and Ferry Terminal serve as a major transportation hub for Kitsap County. With close access to Seattle, many regional commuters travel through Bremerton to access the ferry. Bremerton is also home to the largest employer in Kitsap County, Naval Base Kitsap (NBK-Bremerton). NBK-Bremerton places significant demands on SR 304 and surrounding roadways, especially during afternoon shift changes. Due to Downtown Bremerton's status as major center for commuters, the local transportation network experiences significant traffic surges in driving, walking, biking, and transit during peak hours. Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure Bremerton downtown has a relatively complete network of sidewalks, however high pedestrian activity areas such as schools and shopping areas have gaps in the sidewalk and pedestrian facilities. This limits mobility and accessibility of some pedestrians between major destinations. Additionally, the city has a bicycle network that is limited to a small number of shared use trails, on -street facilities, and disjointed marked bicycle routes. These gaps in infrastructure, along with a topography that includes many hills, create travel challenges for pedestrians and bicyclists. Transit Access and Availability Kitsap Transit provides local, limited, and shuttle bus transit service on infrequent service schedules. This limits transit -dependent riders' accessibility, and it causes potential transit users to choose driving personal vehicles. In addition to fixed route and shuttle services, Kitsap Transit offers a worker/driver bus program, which functions similarly to a large carpool. This program has seen success in reducing the number of drive alone commute trips within Bremerton at NBK-Bremerton. The City should continue to look for ways to encourage enhanced transit service from Kitsap Transit through investments in projects that compliment transportation demand management programs such as the worker/driver bus, as well as transit -supportive amenities to help residents, employees, and visitor's access and use transit. Ferry Service Access and Availability Both Kitsap Transit and Washington State Ferries serve the Bremerton Ferry Terminal. Ferry service in Bremerton serves thousands of weekly commuters. During peak hours, the Ferry Terminal experiences significant surges in vehicle, walking, and bicycling traffic. Improving bicycle and pedestrian connections to the Ferry Terminal can help to further alleviate congestion in the downtown area. Regional Growth Regional development outside of Bremerton will play a major role in the growing demands on the City's transportation network by 2036. Kitsap County is expected to continue adding residents and jobs during this time period. This growth will add traffic to Bremerton's streets, and the City must make a concerted effort to accommodate its own growth, while coordinating with its partners outside the city on regional needs. Puget Sound Industrial Center (PSIC) According to the PSIC Subarea Plan (formerly known as the SKIA Subarea Plan), 12 miles of trails are planned within the development area. It is anticipated that new roadways would have sidewalks on at least one side of the corridor. At this time, there are no other planned or funded transit, pedestrian, or bicycle improvements anticipated within PSIC-Bremerton. As PSIC- Bremerton develops as an attractive job center and employment grows, it is possible Mason Transit or Kitsap Transit will provide bus service. Safe Routes for All, Especially Pedestrians and Bicycles Since 2010, Bremerton has experienced nearly 700 traffic collisions per year. Figure 12 display traffic crashes around the City over a five-year period spanning 2010-2014. Figure 13 shows the severity of accidents by location. Figure 14 displays bicycle and pedestrian crashes. As an effort to increase pedestrian safety, Bremerton has undertaken sidewalk and crosswalk improvement projects to create a better environment for pedestrians moving around downtown, routes to schools, and key corridors. Corridors with a high number of collisions involving pedestrians and bicyclists include Warren Avenue, Burwell Street, and 6th Street. There were four vehicle related fatalities; two on SR 3, one on Wheaton Way, and one on Schley Blvd; and one pedestrian fatality on SR 30. R v C3 c O O M - N N v 3 Op LL R v C3 c O O M - N N ........................�� /.. mw y4 ( ( MEMEN, \ } mw y4 ( ( MEMEN, \ } Downtown Circulation Bremerton's downtown circulation pattern is a mixed network of one-way and two-way streets that face unique geographic and traffic demands. The downtown core is the primary area of congestion for Bremerton. Much of the community recognizes that Bremerton's congestion is greatest between 4:00 pm and 4:45 pm. During this time, many workers are released from work, including approximately 20,000 civilians and active duty personnel who work for Navy Commands located on NBK- Bremerton. This is approximately 5,000 people less than the 2014 Seattle Mariners' average attendance. This results in a rush of vehicles departing from downtown parking garages, bus trips departing from the Bremerton Transportation Center, and ferry trips arriving/departing to Seattle, Port Orchard and Annapolis. As a result, daily vehicle traffic backs up quickly on Burwell Street, 6th Street, 11th Street and Warren Avenue. Between fixed -route buses and ferries connecting at the Bremerton Transportation Center, to the release of major employment centers during peak hours, Downtown Bremerton experiences significant multimodal traffic congestion. Adding to the congestion is limited east -west and north -south arterials that create chokepoints, such as the Warren Avenue and Manette Bridge. Some key elements to be recognized for downtown circulation include the following. Naval Base Kitsap Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and IMF and many other Navy Commands are located onboard NBK-Bremerton in the urban core of Bremerton. Due to its location and position as a major regional employment center, Navy Employers on NBK-Bremerton contribute to a significant amount of traffic congestion. During shift changes, traffic increases on the roadways surrounding the base, with the greatest number of vehicles exiting the base on weekdays around 4:00 pm. There is a variety of transit incentives being utilized by employers located on NBK- Bremerton in coordination with Kitsap Transit and the Washington State Ferries to provide alternatives to driving to work. The Commands located on NBK-Bremerton expect to see increased employment in the future, which will further stress the transportation system surrounding the base as well as downtown parking availability, as many of the employees who work on the base currently use city -owned parking garages and surface lots. Downtown Parking Demand Bremerton's downtown on -street parking supply is currently available on a first-come, first -serve basis, with time restrictions in some locations. City -owned parking areas include Harborside Garage, Washington Garage, Park Plaza Garage, City Lot 95, and City Lot 98. Anticipated growth and development in the central core may necessitate more active parking management in the future as demand for parking increases. Peak Hour Transit Ridership During morning and afternoon peak hours, the Bremerton Transportation Center and Ferry Terminal experience high numbers of passengers. The ferry service alone experiences over 10,000 boardings weekly on Kitsap Transit foot ferries to Annapolis and Port Orchard, and over 28,000 weekly boardings between Bremerton and Seattle. Community Outreach Community input regarding the future of transportation in Bremerton was collected at a public meeting and stakeholder workshop. Community members and stakeholder groups were asked to answer questions regarding the future of Bremerton's transportation in regards to prioritizing projects and funding, as well as identifying priority network routes and projects for all modes. Participants showed a desire for multimodal investments, improved network connectivity, and enhanced safety in Bremerton. Stakeholder Meeting On July 28th, 2015 a stakeholder workshop was conducted with the City of Bremerton and key stakeholders. The purpose of the meeting was to examine the transportation needs of Bremerton and identify both transportation challenges and opportunities for improvement. Stakeholder feedback, in regards to the most needed and visionary projects for Bremerton, can be seen in Table 3. Table 3: Stakeholder Input WHAT IS THE MOST NEEDED PROJECT IN BREMERTON?• WHAT IS THE MOST VISIONARY PROJECT FOR • Multimodal connections to Bremerton Centers • Have the choice to move safely through Bremerton by all modes • Updated facilities for all users • Create an interconnected multimodal transportation system • Roadway maintenance • Create a seawater path system • Parking management • Improve parking management and repurpose underutilized lots • Ferry connections • Increase land use diversity in downtown • ADA facilities and improvements • Improve Kitsap Transit connections to Olympic College • Traffic congestion relief on SR 3/304 interchange • Be the transportation hub of Kitsap County • East -west bicycle routes • Adapt to new transportation technologies Public Meeting Nearly 200 comments were received at the public meeting. Community members provided input on what impacts how people travel in Bremerton today and what transportation projects should be the highest priority for funding. Respondents showed a desire for multimodal investments to reduce congestion, enhance safety and improve network connectivity. It is important to note that the comments collected likely underrepresent regional commuters, as the majority of respondents were local residents. In addition, the meeting was heavily attended the bicycle community, which may have over represented Bremerton residents' bicycle interests and priorities. Approximately 60 percent of the issues affecting residents' travel today involved safety (23%) and the lack of pedestrian (22%) and bicycle (15%) facilities, as seen in Figure 15. Figure 16 outlines which projects were identified as the highest priority for funding— the top tier projects included: • Build more sidewalks and crosswalks, improve existing crosswalks • Make routes for bikes on quiet streets (greenways) • Provide bike lanes on arterial streets • Replace and repair older infrastructure Figure 15: Greatest Impacts to Travel Safety their V)airlkiini Il eiriry sell I iraffffiic congestion I1...aclk of sidewalks I1...aclk of lbiicyclle ffaciill ill ii(oaaway irmnaiintenance ® Inadequate I3us Sell II-Iliigh speed and traffic iin illirllha ods Figure 16: Priorities for Funding I 25 0 20 1 IS 15 14 :.r..0 5 4 2 0 ����� tr® k`a� �OqA; - �`a � �� Q Q Jy 81!11�, `� Bremerton envisions a future transportation system that serves all users and modes of travel by offering a safe and robust network of walkways, bicycle facilities, intersections, and roadways. This section describes Bremerton's vision for its future transportation network and the infrastructure improvements that will get the City there. As a part of the Comprehensive Plan update, the City is planning for expected growth in housing units and employment over the next 20 years through 2036. Based on growth estimates from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and review by City staff, Bremerton is preparing for 8,050 new housing units and 20,244 new workers by 2036 within the city limits and urban growth area. This translates into a population growth of approximately 1.5 percent annually. As identified in this plan, most of the improvements are focused on the development of a 'layered' transportation network, which focuses less on providing vehicular capacity and more on accommodating all modes of travel. - While some of the roadway improvements are needed to meet the City's vehicular level of service (LOS) standard, many of the future improvements focus on providing safer and more complete facilities for walking, bicycling, and riding transit in order to improve access and mobility for all road users. Introduction to the Layered Network It can be a challenge for a single roadway to meet the demands and expectations of all modes at any given time. This is also generally not desirable from a user or a planning perspective. In response to this challenge, the City of Bremerton has adopted a layered network approach that focuses on how the City's transportation network can function as a system to meet the needs of all users. In such a system, individual travel modes are prioritized on different facilities throughout the overall network. Figure 17 illustrates the concept of a layered network. The City will implement this layered network through a system of roadway typologies that define each street's user priorities and associated infrastructure needs. Figure 17: Layered Network Concept Modal Networks Streets in Bremerton serve different travel purposes, and the modal networks therefore prioritize a different balance of users on each corridor. Determining how the entire transportation network fits together in Bremerton requires identifying desirable streets for each mode, combining them to locate overlaps, and then assigning priority to certain modes. The following sections review the priority networks for each mode and establish their level of service standards. Pedestrian The highest level of accommodation for walking, indicated in the green row, would provide sidewalks on both sides of the road as shown in the Pedestrian Priority Network. The yellow level of accommodation would make strong progress in building out the Pedestrian Priority Network by filling sidewalks gaps around the City in locations nearby pedestrian generators, such as retail, schools and parks. Incomplete or missing pedestrian facilities would fall into the red category and not satisfy the City's goals for accommodating pedestrians. While Bremerton's local streets tend not to Table 4: Pedestrian Accommodation- Sidewalk Provision need fully separate sidewalks or paths due to their low traffic volumes and slow speeds, the City's arterials and commercial collectors do warrant pedestrian infrastructure. Dense areas with commercial land uses and streets that serve schools, parks, and churches are particularly important for safe walking, as they support more pedestrians and may have a larger portion of vulnerable users than other streets. Figure 18 highlights the Pedestrian Priority Network, which specifies where pedestrian infrastructure should be provided in the long-term. Building on the Pedestrian Priority Network, Table 4 establishes guidance in terms of the level of accommodation that the City wishes to provide for pedestrians around the City. PRIORITYWITHIN PEDESTRIAN •R 0 Sidewalk provided on both sides of the road* Sidewalk or wide shoulder provided on one side of the road 0 No pedestrian facility provided Bicycling Bremerton's existing bicycle network consists of bike lanes, shared -use markings and a number of trails and shared -use pathways. Bicyclists face many challenges connecting to existing facilities and traveling crosstown due to limited bicycle facilities, poor pavement conditions, and feelings of unease on the majority of the connecting roads. Key mobility corridors for bicyclists, such as Naval Avenue and Lebo Boulevard would be best served with on -street bike lanes, while bike boulevards and shared use paths would suffice on streets such as 4th and 5th Avenues. Figure 19 highlights the Bicycle Priority Network, which specifies where pedestrian infrastructure should be provided in the long-term. The City of Bremerton can strive for the green level of accommodation for bicycling by installing the bicycle facilities depicted in the Bicycle Priority Network or a facility that offers greater separation from vehicle traffic. At a minimum, the City should make meaningful progress toward constructing this network by building some initial north -south and east -west spines. Incomplete or missing bicycle facilities do not meet the City's desired level of accommodation for bicycling, as described in Table 5. Table 5: Bicycle Accommodation- Facility Descriptions PRIORITYWITHIN BICYCLE •R 0 Provides minimum treatment* recommendation, as shown within the Bicycle Priority Network Provides a lower -level facility than °11110' recommend in the Bicycle Priority Network 0, No bicycle facility or signage -M Transit Transit operations are out of the City's direct control, but Bremerton can still aim to create corridors that are welcoming to transit. The City will continue to work with transit agencies to enhance transit use by offering street lighting, safe routes for accessing transit stops, and other passenger amenities. Bremerton's level of transit accommodation is based on the amenity provision guidelines established by transit agencies serving Bremerton. The City can reach the highest level of accommodation (green) by providing the level of transit -supportive amenities recommended including sidewalks, and marked crosswalks at all stops, as well as other supportive amenities, to support more frequent service. Bremerton's measurement of transit accommodation is summarized in Table 6. Table 6: Transit Accommodation- Stop Amenities and Pedestrian Access TRANSIT O. AMENITIES More than 80% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions More than 60% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions 0, Less than 60% of transit stops meet amenity minimum provisions REGIONAL TRANSIT COORDINATION One of the City's top priority in this plan is effective coordination with regional players to ensure that the local and regional transportation systems complement one another. A key element of this will be partnering with Kitsap Transit, Mason Transit, and Washington State Ferries to provide local transit alternatives for getting across town. The potential increase in Kitsap Transit service offers a major opportunity to explore how the transit station can be better integrated with the City's multimodal transportation system and increase demand for local transit services. Freight and Auto Residents and workers in Bremerton use nearly every street in the roadway network at some point each day to access their homes, jobs, and other destinations. Many of these streets are local streets, however, and do not see significant traffic volumes throughout the day. Similarly, goods movement and delivery vehicles use some corridors frequently while other streets see only the occasional local delivery. Figure 3 (page 12) calls out the functional classification of each of Bremerton's streets, in terms of whether it is an arterial, collector, or local street. These classes indicate the level of priority of each street for automobiles, specifically in terms of facilitating vehicle and freight mobility as well as other modes. Bremerton's transportation network is constantly evolving along with the character of its roadways. As part of this update, changes to Bremerton's functional classification are being considered for roadways such as Sherman Heights Road, Charleston Beach Road, Cherry Avenue, and others. Figure 10 (page 22) specifies the WSDOT freight classification of Bremerton's major streets that support goods movement. These classifications indicate the annual weight of goods that travel a corridor, whether via large trailer loads or smaller delivery vehicles. The functional classification and freight class of a street should guide future investments in streetscape and LOS objectives. Given the low growth rates for household and employment projected for Bremerton, future forecast delay at intersections differ little than from today. Of the 14 intersections analyzed as part of this update, all intersections (existing and future) meet the City's LOS standards. Also, the growth anticipated on state-owned facilities is driven by regional growth, as well as growth anticipated within the City. To address this, the City's network has capacity to absorb some growth. Delays on parts of the City's network are a result of backups on the regional network, rather than local -level capacity constraints. The Technical Analysis of this Appendix summarizes existing and future forecast delay at intersections in the City. The capital list provided in next section includes future roadway projects that would maintain the City's intersection LOS standard through 2036. Mode split targets For its regional growth centers (RGCs), the City of Bremerton is required to develop mode split targets that align with the policy goals of planning these areas to be more compact and accessible for walking, biking, and transit modes. The following table provides existing and envisioned future mode split targets for commute trips within Bremerton's Downtown Regional Growth Center and the Puget Sound Industrial Center (PSIC), which is a Regional Manufacturing/Industrial Center. The 2010 mode share estimates come from Puget Sound Regional Council's (PSRC's) regional travel survey. The future mode share estimates for each center were developed based on national travel survey, which show how non -SOV mode share can increase when a greater mix of uses, improved infrastructure for walking and biking, and proximate transit are provided. These increased non -SOV mode shares reflect the City's goal of accommodating travel by all modes and prioritizing transportation investments within the regional growth centers (RGCs). These mode share goals also informed the travel modeling performed for this plan to ensure that transportation infrastructure investments align with forecasted travel demand. Table 7: Mode Split Targets for Regional Growth Centers in Bremerton MODE Drive Alone DOWNTOWN BREMERTONSOUND 20101 69% 2036 66°% 20101 89°% 2036 85°% Carpool 9% 10% 9% 11% Transit 13% 14°% 1°% 2°% Walk/Bike 9% 10°% 1°% 2°% This section presents the capital and roadway maintenance projects that forms the basis of this Transportation Plan. The overall capital plans were developed to create a transportation system that realizes Bremerton's ultimate transportation vision: to promote, manage, and maintain a safe, efficient, and integrated multi -modal transportation system to support a healthy and vibrant community. • T1: Promote and develop transportation systems that stimulate, support, and enhance the movement of people and goods to ensure a prosperous economy. • T2: Acknowledge the existing built environment and maintain, preserve, and extend the life and utility of prior investments in transportation systems and services. • TI Provide for and improve the safety and security of transportation users and the transportation system. • T4: Enhance Bremerton's quality of life through transportation investments that promote energy conservation, healthy communities, aesthetics, and protect the environment. • T5: Continuously improve the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of the transportation system. ' Summarizes the projects that were identified for PSIC-Bremerton through the PSIC Subarea Plan With these goals in mind, as well as completing the layered networks described in the previous sections, the project list was developed. Table 8 summarizes the recommended capital projects for the City and PSIC-Bremerton', as well as operation and maintenance needs for the next twenty years. These projects represent a balance of safety, maintenance, and operational improvements for all modes. Figure 22 to 24 display the locations of these projects around the City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................. ............................. ............................. ............................. ............................ ............................. .............................................. ............................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................. ............................ 41 U') 0 rI rI rI rI rI rI rI m . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................. ............................. ............................. ............................. ............................ ............................. .............................................. ............................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................. ............................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� Ul -q U') 0 r, 0 0 0 0 U') k.0 0 00 0 0 Ul r14 0 U-) Ul 00 0 r14 0 0 0 lD 0 rl M 41 0 F- . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................. ............................. ............................. ............................. ............................ ............................. .............................................. ............................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................. ............................ 0 O 0 0 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 .2 0 Ln E0 CL u u u u u U uco 2 c 01 >a) U u u 0 c a) c 01 > a) c CL c c m c 0— U u 0 u C CL 01 01 01 01 01 01 C CL vmiCL CL CL CL CL CL 0 t E 01 01 01 01 01 01 U u u u u u u 0CL 01 01 CL -0 01 CL -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 -0 41 a) a) a) a) a) u a) a) a) a) a) a) 41 > > > > > > > > > > > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m L 0 0 0 0 0 0 C -0CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL w a) E E E E E E E CL E E E E E E co . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................. — ............................. — ............................. — ............................. — ............................ ............................. .............................................. — ............................. D 0 .............................................. ............................................. ........................................................ ............................ ............................. ............................ N W 41 6 C w 0 Ln m w 41 E E 0 u 0 m m LO 0 0 41 CL 41 m bb u 41 D 0 41 E 0 W W 0 41 C C 41 w 41 0 41 E 2 a a m > 41 0 0 0 41 C C C 41 0 O C N C 41 0 0) 0 0 .2 41 C m (A 41 > E m 4' V) 0 C w t 41 > E m 41 m LU W w 41 bb 2 CL C w E m 0 CL co C C E w m r- 0 m 41 C 0 m C C E 41 m m 0) > bb 0 CL 4m' 41 C 41 C m u 0 CL E — w E w 41 — > w C -0 bb 0 CL D E 4- (A E CL Z 0- r- CL E E Lu m 0 m .0 E E w C LU C 0 m > 41 bb > m m m 41 0 u > (A 41 ? 41 m 0 m — co E C CL r > m C 0 C m m > > 0 en bb 0 0 m C & 0 0 m 0 41 z F- = LL .9 Z z C (A (A (A —j 0) . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............................. ............................. ............................. ............................. ............................ ............................. .............................................. ............................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................. ............................ rl eq rn LM W N 00 0) 0 rl eq rn :T LM 41 00 rl m F- .............................. I .............................. ............................. .............................. ............................. .............................. ............................. ............................................... ............................. ............................................... ............................ ........... I ............................. .. ........... I .............................. ............................. ............................ ............................................. ............................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................................. In m Ul Ul r -I r14 r -I r -I Ul) -q -q -q -q . ............................ ............................................. ............................. .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� C� 0 0 0 0 0 Ul 0 0 Ul 0 0 0 0 0 0 lD 0 R* m r, U') 00 r, U') 0 0 0 U') 0 lD r -I R* Il k.0 R* U') U') r14 r, I -z V)- r� I V)- N 0 tf)- tf)- .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2 2 2 -Ln 0 0 0 u a) u a) u a) u a) 0 0 > u u a) 0 0 u0 > 0 u U u u 0 u > m m w0 -0 m -0 CL > > c u c C u c E 2 u u Ln 0 a) >� u 0 u 0 U _ie 0 0 c 0 m > > U u m m m C c c 72 m m 0 m c 0 CL w a) 0 a) 0 c a) 0 CL E CL CL CL CL CL m CL CL c m m 0 u u -2 -2 CL CL = 2 u uw w w u 0 m j ju u u u U u 0 E -0 CL CL > m M M CL -0 > U a) 0 a) a) c a) C i a) a) a) 0 u > > > > > E > > > a) > > > E 'a 0 0 0 0 0 u CL . 5; 0 0 c 0 c 0 0 0 cL E CL CL CL CL CL CL CL m CL CL CL CL E E E E E E ECL E — E — E = 0 ............................. ............................................. ............................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................................. LU bb .Ln 0 Ln (A 14 m:2 m E 0 0 3: Lnbb co 0 w bb 0 0 -6 m C m C w u M. co C 0 0 > iz 4a C bb C• w 0 41 m z m 41 C m w E 41 C m 41 (A 06 E m 0) E w > co LU 0 0 41 > C 0 41 u m r " OC V) 41 w cn 0 0 41 r m CL u m C C 41 s 41 m 41W 06 > W 41 w w w 'a r- 2 (A 0 4' C -Fu m D 41 C m w E w -0 bb W w 0 4" C 0 bb > w m 41 0 m E m bb C w bb C w m (A C CL w -0 bb 0 C w 0 C (A M = 4, m u -0 — m C CL E w -, -, ?: o6 E 0 3: C (A C — m M co C m 41 m M 1 > r 0 0 .2 M 0 LU o co C t w 0 41 u m -j t 2 -0 M ?: 41 en > C 0 0w 0 E M m 41 CL > 0 14 C m M E 06 41 u = u > bb r 41 LLI > 0 a C 0 0 C L04 C 0) 0) m a 41 41 0) 0) u Co W 41 w E 41 (A o en 11 41 M .2 4' M -0 41 r m 41 W m C a CL 41 .0 = m 0 en 4, = M C z Q < 0 2 u C'n C'n E 3: w$ C -n co w v= w 0 0. V) 3: D (A 0 W ............................ W ............................................. ............................. N 00 .............................................. cn .............................................. 0 .............................................. 14 ............................ eq ............................................. en ............................ :T ............................................. In ............................................. w ............................................. N ............................................. 00 ............................ cn ............................................. 0 14 .............................. 14 14 .............................................. ............................. 14 ............................................... eq .............................................. eq ............................................... eq ............................. eq ...............................................I eq ............................. eq ...............................................I eq ........................... eq ................................................ eq ............................ eq .............................. en .............................................. ............................ ............................. .............................................. ............................. ............................ ............................ ............................. ............................ ............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................................. M M N U') M M M M ul M ul M N Ul -q r -I r -I m r -I r -I r -I r -I m r -I m r -I r,4 r -I r -I . ............................ ............................ ............................................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................. ............................ ............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 In 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 r- 6 0 Ul 0 0 0 0 Ul 0 0 k.0 lD (') (') 0 00 0 r, a) 0 R* r -I r14 V)- r -I r14 V)- tf)- tf)- tf)- r14 -q -q tf)- i/)- rf� i/)- i/)- IA- i/)- i/)- i/)- i/)- i/)- IA- ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 2 2 U U u u u u 0 0 0 0 0 U > 0 C C > C C > > E uu a) a) u a) CL C c c 0 cm 0 m 0 0 0 0 c 0 c 0 0 0 E u E E E E u u m m > 0m c 75- m m m CL 0 0 0 0 0 CL 0 CL CL M CL CL m m > Y m M �o U • bA >YO1 0 0 0 0 0 0 O1 > -0 CL -0 CL CL 0 a) O1 a)a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) E > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL E E E E E E E E E E E E E E ............................. ............................. =) .............................................. ............................. ............................ ............................ ............................. ............................ ............................................. ............................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................................. C 00 0 C 0 m C NC m C E m .2 m m > m u w > bb w CL C m bb m > 0 -0 bb > LU CL m > C 0 01 D C m m 0C CL m 0 C -0 C w m ?: "M 4a 4a bb E C > C m C m E 0 C 3: C C C 0) > 3z C 0) > 4a 0 4a E E C m 0 2 m 0 > > C (A m C m +-, (D M CL o 2 2 0 w C 0 CL = E E — CL CL -0 bb s > C m bb r w m > m 4a E m 4a < Z; +-, ul D 0 C w 0 +-, C w C 0 o w E 0 2 bb 0 > .2 bb 41 C 41 41 E w 4' C > 0 C 0) Z C 41 0) m C 4- 0) w 0) m M m 41 Z; = 41 o L) 4' 2 u CL > 0) 4' C 0) m 0 bb (A > a w ba M 41 41 EL > E m > > 41 m > 41 m w E w m a E m m E m w w > w 41 w r w co w > CL M W E w > (A 0 co E 41 41 W u " m m .2 w C 41 W 2 C CL 41 W C C (U > V4 a w -0 (A CL > E m CL M W > m 0 E 0 W 0 m > 0 w 0 W a 0 0 Cr o 2 u u < 0 Z V) m . ............................ 14 ............................. eq ............................................. rn ........................... :T ............................ In ............................ W ............................. N ............................ 00 ............................................. cn ............................ 0 ............................................. 14 ............................................. eq ............................................. rn ............................................. . ............................ LM ............................................. w M .............................. en .............................. en .............................................. en .............................. rn ............................. rn ............................ rn .............................. rn ............................. rn ............................................... ............................. ............................................... .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. ............................. .............................................. ............................ ............................................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................. ............................. .............................................. ...................................... ...................................... .............................................. ........................................................... ............................................ ..................................... ...................................... m m m m m m U) m m m Ul Ul . ............................ ............................................. .............................................. .............................................. ............................. ............................. ............................................. ..................................... ...................................... .............................................. ........................................................... ............................................ ..................................... ...................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lr� 6 6 6 6 Lr� 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 ll 0 0 0 Ul N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 tf)- N 0 0 IA- 1/)- 0 0 0 U') 0 0 0 i/)- NM U') lD 00 m 00 i/)- IA- i/)- IA- IA- . ............................ ............................................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................. ............................. ............................................. ..................................... ...................................... .............................................. ........................................................... ............................................ ..................................... ...................................... u u 0 0 UVfVf u u U u u u c c C c > 0 0 0 m > N 01 '-p U a) u 01 > 01 > u a) Z; 0 0 c0 c 0 0 N > E E c 0 CL CL CO u 01 E E 01 01 u U c 0 C 0 co 01 01 0 c U 0 0 0 0 CLCL m m> u Z; Z; !E u u01 0 > a) CL CL a) c c CL 01 CL 01 01 01 > L E 0 u 0 u 01 01 U u 0 U u u u >� >•>•�: t�: u Y Y u0 u u u CL -0 > 0 > > 0 0 > > 0 0 >> 0 0 > 0 0 u :3 u :3 > 0 > 0 CL CL CL CL CL CLCL CL CL -0 -0 CL CL E E E E E E E E E E E ............................. ............................................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................. ............................. .............................................. ...................................... ...................................... .............................................. ........................................................... ............................................ ..................................... ...................................... 4a > 41 4a 0 4a Cm C C > m 0 0) E 4a C m E 0) E 0) 0) 0) > 0) E m > > CL C 0 2 0 m C m co CL > co CL CL C•0 > -0 E 0 E E bb w +-, 1- -0 C > CL 12 m W (A 0 E 0 (A m 0 E V) +-, C 0 C > C (A C m +-, C C 0 0 C 0 C 0 E E w .2 _lme u m m CL 4a m .0 41 co > 4a U m C 0 m 0) C m 0) > 0 2 M 0) W > m 41 (A > E 0) 41 0) F- > 41 C a Gl 41 E m bb m 0 -Z 0 3 0 bb 3 0 _lme 0 41 > 3: m (A 41 CL V4 m 4' C w 41 > C Gi r 0) 00 0 OC 41 3: m 0 C 41 t 41 a 0) 0) r 41 41 0 -0 m 00 0) C m M M Q. 0) 41 m 0 0) 0 a m 2 0) 41 41 m m m 1- z ca �id CL =w = (n'o co LLI . ............................ N ............................................. .............................................. 00 0) .............................................. ............................. 0 rl ............................. eq ............................................. rn ..................................... :T ...................................... LM .............................................. W ........................................................... N ............................................ 00 ..................................... 0) ...................................... 0 :T ............................ :T :T ...................................... ........... ............... In In .............................................. .............................. In ............................. In .............................................. In ..................................... In ....................................... In ............................................... In ............................................................. In .............................................. In ....................................... tD ....................................... .............................................................. ............................................................... .............................................................. .............................................................. .............................. ----------- ........................................................... ............................................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. to to to to ............................................................... ............................................................. ............................................................. .............................................................. .............................. ----------- ............................................................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. 0 0 0 r, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C� C� C� lz:� C� C� -t 0 0 00 r -I 0 0 m Ln C� C� rl� m 0 lz:� cl� m u R* -q rNr -,-, In- i/)- i/)- IA- 0 041 . .............................................................. .............................................................. ............................................................. .............................................................. .............................. F- . . . . . . . . . . . ............................................................ ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. 0 w 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 > " 0 " > E E E E E O , En w a) r 0 CL 0 CL 0 CL 0 CL 0 CL 0 m u c 0 m u a) 0 c = 0 -T -2 0 c CL 0 c to c 0 4--u r - c 0 4- cLo 0 CL 0 CL CL L 0 CL L 0 > > m u u 0 0 0 0 0 a) 0 w 0 t10 t10 t10 w bD EE E O Lr- o -2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ln U CL a) 0 U CL a)Ln a) a) a) a) a) E s c t E E E E E .7- .- CL CL w E a) a) a) a) a) 0 Ln 0 =0 a) " 0 -0 = a) 0 u u u u u u CL Ln u co V) V) V) V) V) a- > 0 0 > 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CL CL aj CL a) -0 0 a) CL aj -0 C CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL 72E -C E 72 c E = r- w :3 :3 :3 :3 :3 Ln ............................................................... — M ............................................................... — Ln M .............................................................. — M .............................................................. .............................. co . . . . . . . . . . . to ............................................................ to ............................................. to ............................................. to ............................................. to ............................................. J m > E0 E to 0 m 0 V) 41 0 41 m 4- 41 C C 0 0 t m E 41 E 41 0) C w 0) > C w > m > m C > m > m > 0 E 0 E 4- 3: 3: CL w0 > CL > m Mm -0 m E 0 E 2 0 2 m C o 2 0 C CL C CL E CL > co .- t 3: 3: m E m a 0 -0 w w C 0 a CL C C 41• m -6 > m m w m= m m u•0 0 co 0 M 0 0 CL 0 41 o L 0 4, L 0 0 0 m m m m 41 41 0 41 M 41 o 41 C C M M m m 0 m 0 0 41 41 m 41 C C 0 41 41 a u 0 0 m 2 M M M 4, m M 0- W U w 0 " w = w 41 m " cx Lj- " 0 aV) m -j au .............................................................. ri .............................................................. N ............................................................. rn .............................................................. .............................. ----------- ............................................................ ............................................. eq ............................................. rn ............................................. ............................................. to ................................................................ ................................................................. ............................ ........................................... .............................. ............................................................................................................. ............................................... ............................................... ... ............................................. .............................................. .............................................. ............................................. .............................................................. ............................................. ............................................................. .............................................................. .............................................................. ............................................................. ............................................. . ............................................. 0 ............................................ 0 ............................................. 0 ............................................. 0 .............................................................. 0 ............................................. 0 ............................................................. 0 .............................................................. 0 .............................................................. 0 ............................................................. 0 ............................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) 0 0 0 0 U') 0 0 0 U') 0 00 r,4 r,4 m r,4 a) IA- i/)- IA- lo IA- IA- i/)- 1/)- 0 . ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. .............................................................. ............................................. ............................................................. .............................................................. .............................................................. ............................................................. ............................................. E E E E E E E E E E E CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E E E E E E E E E E E co co co co co co co co co co co V) V) V) V) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL CL V) .............................................. V) .............................................. V) .............................................. V) ............................................. V) .............................................................. V) ............................................. V) ............................................................. V) .............................................................. V) .............................................................. V) ............................................................. V) ............................................. la� co -0 4- LU m 0 0 W vi 0 E C M 3: m Z .0 ul en 0 410 > m L bb th 41 CL 4, th CL E Zn 0) " z 0 LL -6 C M W (A m E m .2 41 u 1 0 V 0 co V) m 0 41 > m i OC N -0 M m w m _lme = W M m C 01 4- W C 0 0 m 0 CL 0 w C C 41 C 41 = bp 0 E 41 C U 0 W M j o L 0 -0 m m 0 41 E 'E w Nm 4' W 41 ul w 0 a: a: x E > -F, 0 •C m •W CL 0 Co z C w C -6 41 Lu m m 0 41 r bb C LA .9 m q M r- " 14 _j —j 41 M W 0 41 0 r 0 41 NV) C 0 V) bb C W r m m 0 0 4, 41 C 0 41 m N N E 0 W m r CL M U m m x r- V) r- r- 0 0 — m V) 0 M 0 m 0 M 0 m r- 4, a 0 m 0 r- r 0 0 U Z., bb C Vl W > C CL W W 41 W 0 r- W r r U w r CL r CL 14 C r M r- r - •w 0 0 .2 E = m 0 = .— 41 0 r- V4 41 Mn - a 41 0 m 0 1- 4>- I- •m 0) en .— > m• M CL m 0 M M CL -0 C m o o m 0" OC CL (A m (A E (A bb C (A m bb 0 *vi C 41 < 0 r- C 41 (A < E -�, 0 w u Z o w ! . ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. 00 ............................................. cn .............................................................. 0 ............................................. 14 ....................................... .................... eq .............................................................. en .............................................................. :T ............................................................. Ln ............................................. W ............................................... ............................................... ............................................... ............................................... 14 ............................................................... 14 ............................................... 14 ............................................................... 14 ................................................................ 14 ............................................................... 14 .............................................................. 14 ............................................... .............................................................. .............................................. ............................. U') ............................. . . . . . . . . . . . ............................ .............................................. .............................................. .............................................. ............................................. ............................ 41 U') U') U-) U-) U-) r,4 r,4 r,4 r14 r14 . .............................................................. 0 ............................................ ............................ 0 ................. ... 0 . . . . . . . . . . . ............................. ............................................... 0 0 ............................................. 0 ............................................. 0 ............................................. 0 ............................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 W v 0 0 U') 0 0 LM LL m N 0 00 0 U-) 0 0 en m I u V)- C6 V) - 0 0 V)- U') r, eq 41 V)- -q 14 in 0 .............................................................. ............................................. ............................ ............................. F- . . . . . . . . . . . ............................ .............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................................. ............................ c c c E CL E CL E CL 0 -2 -2 0 10- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 E E E t CL -0 w E m m to CL c u u u > > 0 0 u u V) E 0 c CL c 41 c c 0 0 0 0 41 E E CL CL CL c CL CL CLc > > V) ............................................................... V) .............................................. V) ............................. ............................. 2 . . . . . . . . . . . a- a- ............................ .............................................. ............................................. (D ............................................. ............................................. ............................ 4- 0 -0 0 C 0 m u C a t41 m 41 C 0f r t u m 0 E 0 CL CL E m r m 41 W 41 > W C M r- 0 u W m m C CL 0 0 0 0 —j 0 -0 t 41 w bb 41 bb m E C r 2 -0 > w 0 m w § m w 41 C u m C m bB 0 -0 -0 m C 0 " M C w C 0 3: :t C t6 C 41 41 E m -0 0 " m e m 4_> 4- 0 w w iz 41 = w = m m a 41 m 4' w 4' 0 m 14 C C a 0 m M > > E 41 41 LL' E 0 eq m 41 0) CL 41 m 4' = 0 41 41 C E 41 0 m 41 41 0 Id 41 /- E -0 W > C > Z, r- 'n w C w 41 M 0 o -@ CL m m m m a 0 r " 41 -0 CL " co u 0. 0. co (A (A .............................................................. N ............................................. 00 ............................ cn ............................. . . . . . . . . . . . ............................. ............................................... 14 eq ............................................. mLn ............................................. ............................................. ............................ 14 0 ................................................................ ............................................... . .............................. 0. .............................. .............................. ............................................... .............................................. ............................................. .............................................. ............................ \ ƒ 7 / mia to to J u U OJ 0 i a 0 3 a m v r v 3 N N OJ i 3 Op LL The recommended projects and programs of the Transportation Appendix were developed by travel mode, as described in previous sections. Implementing the Transportation Plan will require close coordination among the City departments, citizens, businesses, and other agencies within the region. To guide the City's implementation of the Transportation Plan, priority should be assigned to assist in assembling an updated six-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), working toward the 2036 planning horizon. This section summarizes the recommended plan. The Transportation Plan is a living document and serves as the blueprint for transportation in Bremerton over the next several years. Realistically, the plan is most useful over the next five years, at which point it should be updated. Several implementation steps should be initiated over the next couple of years to determine if changes are needed, or to reaffirm a particular strategy. Table 9: Costs of Bremerton Transportation Plan (20+years) Overview of Costs and Revenues A key Growth Management Act (GMA) planning requirement is the concept of fiscal restraint in transportation planning. A fiscally constrained Transportation Plan must first allow for operation and maintenance of existing facilities, and then capital improvements. To introduce fiscal constraint into the plan, an inventory of revenues and costs was undertaken to identify funds that are likely to be available for capital construction and operations. The proposed Transportation Plan for the City of Bremerton contains $488 million worth in transportation investments over the next 20 years (refer to Table 8). The Transportation Plan focuses on capital projects that will complete the layered network plan, as well as ongoing maintenance to ensure that the roadway network is kept in good condition. Table 9 summarizes how this overall investment would be broken down by transportation improvement category. *Costs denoted in present year dollars The City of Bremerton has spent around $5 million annually for transportation capital, maintenance, and operations. Revenues include those from outside sources and grants, general city funds, and gas tax receipts. It is important to note that much of the funding that has been available historically was generated from grants. Further, transportation funding has failed to meet the City's needs, especially in regards to operation and maintenance. If the city were able to maintain this level of revenue, the City could afford around $43 million in capital projects, and $60 million on operation and maintenance over the next 20 years$. This amount is less than the City's anticipated need. The comparison of revenues to costs indicates that the city will need to carefully prioritize its projects, because not all of the transportation needs are likely to be affordable with existing revenue sources during the 20 -year period. If this occurs, the City has several options: • Increase the amount of revenue from existing sources, including parking fees, transportation benefit district, or increased general fund revenues. • Adopt new sources of revenue (see text box below). • Lower the level of service standard, and therefore reduce the need for some transportation improvements. Note that the city could also weigh changing the land use element to reduce the amount of development planned (and thus reduce the need for additional public facilities). However, in a community such as Bremerton, that serves travelers from unincorporated Kitsap County, land use changes would not likely result in a substantially reduced facility needs. PSIC-Bremerton The proposed 20 year project list for the PSIC- Bremerton Subarea Plan' contains $206 million worth in transportation investments over the next 20 years (refer to Table 8). There are many sources of funds that can be used for PSIC-Bremerton transportation projects. Typically, two parties will pay for the needed transportation facilities: the government, and/or the developer/owner of the property. Government funding sources may include: real estate excise taxes, motor vehicle license fees, property taxes, grants, and other sources of funding. Developers will be responsible for SEPA mitigation fees, as outlined in PSIC-Bremerton Planned Action Ordinance 5189. As outlined in PSIC-Bremerton Subarea Plan (formerly known as the SKIA Subarea Plan) the financing plan for transportation projects is based on the following assumptions: • Grants will be sought and used to pay for as much of the project costs as possible. • PSIC developers/property owners are responsible for funding the portion of local roads that are not funded by grants. s Based on the average funding for capital and operation and 9 Formerly the SKIA Subarea Plan maintenance over the past five years (in present year dollars). • The state is responsible for the cost of state road projects other than local matching requirements. • The local share of state road projects depends on the matching requirement of specific grants. Recent experience ranges from 1 to 2 percent. Table 11 outlines the PSIC-Bremerton projects by category and what parties are expected to contribute to projects' funding. Table 10: PSIC- Bremerton Projects (20+years) *Costs denoted in present year dollars WHAT ARE POTENTIAL NEW REVENUE SOURCES? o Proceeds from General Obligation Bonds o Creation of Local Improvement Districts o Mitigation fees for pedestrian and bicycle facilities o Reciprocal impact fees with adjacent jurisdictions o Property tax levy lid lift for transportation o Business license fee per employee o Traffic impact fees o Vehicle Tab Fees o State law changes related to transportation funding o Federal payments in lieu of taxes The city can explore the feasibility and likely revenue amounts from these or other sources, as the plan is implemented over the next several years. Setting Priorities Project prioritization is needed to help identify when best to fund and implement the projects since funding is limited. Criteria were established to help prioritize the projects and implementation. These criteria are not listed in any priority order and identified in the following text box. Using these criteria, the recommended projects will need to be evaluated and ranked based on how well each could meet the criteria. Because one of the criteria relates to funding availability, priorities may shift over time as fund sources change. High priority projects for Bremerton are those that meet multiple criteria in terms of effectiveness, benefit to the community, and ability to be implemented. These attributes will allow the City to take advantage of a variety of public and private funding sources to complete key projects. Monitoring and Evaluation The Transportation Plan is a long-range plan that enables the City to plan for its current and future transportation needs. Nonetheless, the transportation network is dynamic, constantly changing due to circumstances beyond the scope and influence of this plan. Hence, regular updates are necessary to ensure the plan remains current and relevant. The Transportation Plan includes the following actions to monitor and evaluate the progress of implementing the plan. CRITERIA FOR PROJECT PRIORITIZATION •Meets City's transportation goals: o T1: Promote and develop transportation systems that stimulate, support, and enhance the movement of people and goods to ensure a prosperous economy o T2: Acknowledge the existing built environment and maintain, preserve, and extend the life and utility of prior investments in transportation systems and services. o T3: Provide for and improve the safety and security of transportation users and the transportation system. o T4: Enhance Bremerton's quality of life through transportation investments that promote energy conservation, healthy communities, aesthetics and protect the environment. o T5: Continuously improve the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of the transportation system. • aintains/improves safety of traveling in Bremerton • Provides tangible benefits to Bremerton residents • Leverages non -city (federal, state, private) funds freeing up city revenues for additional projects Bi -Annual Mobility Report Card A bi-annual mobility report card will be developed to document progress towards plan implementation and to monitor the transportation system performance. The City will use this information to inform the public regarding the City's actions, and results, related to the Transportation Plan. The report card will also provide a basis for future updates of the Transportation Plan. The report card is expected to report on the following topics: • Land Use and Transportation Trends — These data will describe general land use and transportation trends within Bremerton. Information will include: o Current population and employment levels and growth rates, o Summary of yearly development activity, and o Summary of growth in traffic volumes, transit service and other trends • Transportation Performance —These data will focus on documenting the current performance of the transportation system, by mode. Information will include: o Transit route ridership (from Kitsap Transit, Mason Transit, and Washington State Ferries) o Park-and-ride lot utilization o On -street parking utilization in downtown and nearby park-and-ride locations o Traffic volumes o Collisions o Traffic level of service (auto/truck priority corridors) o Pedestrian and bicycle volumes o Pavement Maintenance Ratings • Project Implementation Status —These data will summarize the city's progress towards implementing the priority network improvements recommended in the Transportation Plan. Information is expected to include: o Auto/truck facilities constructed o Pedestrian facilities constructed o Bicycle facilities constructed o Transit stop improvements implemented o Miles of Pavement overlays The report card will provide the necessary information to help the city adjust transportation priorities and to facilitate updates to the Transportation Plan every few years. City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan Tech endices City Services Appendix 1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................1 1.1 The Capital Facilities Plan.......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Utilities Plan............................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Key Principles Guiding Bremerton's Capital Investments.........................................................3 1.4 Capital Facilities and Utilities Addressed in the City Services Appendix ................................... 3 1.5 Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Plan........................................4 1.6 Foundation Documents (Incorporation by Reference)............................................................. 5 2.0 Capital Facilities Revenue Analysis.................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Overview.................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Funding the Capital Facility Plan............................................................................................... 6 2.3 Assumptions..............................................................................................................................6 2.4 Dedicated Capital Revenues...................................................................................................... 7 2.5 General Capital Revenues....................................................................................................... 24 2.6 Total Capital Revenues............................................................................................................ 26 2.7 Impacts of Annexation............................................................................................................ 26 2.8 Policy Options and Other Funding Sources............................................................................. 27 2.9 Six -Year Cost and Revenue Comparison.................................................................................. 29 2.10 Other Service Providers........................................................................................................... 33 3.0 Comprehensive Capital Facility Plan................................................................................................ 33 3.1 Inventory................................................................................................................................. 33 3.2 Levels of Service Consequences..............................................................................................33 3.3 Projects....................................................................................................................................34 3.4 UGA Analysis............................................................................................................................34 4.0 Capital Facility Detail....................................................................................................................... 35 4.1 Fire and Emergency Services................................................................................................... 35 4.2 Law Enforcement..................................................................................................................... 40 4.3 Parks and Recreation...............................................................................................................44 4.4 Public Buildings........................................................................................................................ 52 4.5 Transportation.........................................................................................................................54 4.6 Sewer / Wastewater................................................................................................................ 54 4.7 Stormwater..............................................................................................................................64 4.8 Water.......................................................................................................................................68 4.9 Schools.....................................................................................................................................76 4.10 Solid Waste.............................................................................................................................. 82 5.0 Utilities Detail..................................................................................................................................83 5.1 Electrical..................................................................................................................................83 5.2 Natural Gas.............................................................................................................................. 84 5.3 Telecommunications............................................................................................................... 86 6.0 UGA Population Scenario — Kitsap County Preferred Alternative...................................................87 6.1 Fire and Emergency Services................................................................................................... 87 6.2 Law Enforcement..................................................................................................................... 87 6.3 Parks and Recreation............................................................................................................... 88 6.4 Public Buildings........................................................................................................................ 88 6.5 Transportation.........................................................................................................................88 6.6 Sewer/Wastewater................................................................................................................. 88 6.7 Stormwater..............................................................................................................................88 6.8 Water.......................................................................................................................................89 WorksCited.................................................................................................................................................90 The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that the Capital Facilities Element of a Comprehensive Plan include an inventory, projected needs, and funding and financing for facilities and infrastructure. GMA also requires a Utilities Element addressing the current system and projected needs for power, natural gas, and telecommunications. This City Services Appendix is intended to provide the technical foundation — inventory, service standards, capacity, proposed projects, and funding as appropriate — for the GMA required elements of Capital Facilities and Utilities. The goals and policies for these required elements are contained in the City Services Element of Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan. LIThe Capital Facilities The purpose of the Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) contained in Sections 1 through 4 of this City Services Appendix is to use sound fiscal policies to provide adequate public facilities consistent with the land use element and concurrent with, or prior to, the impacts of development in order to achieve and maintain adopted standards for levels of service. The CFP is based on the following sources of information and assumptions: • Capital Facility Functional or System Plans. Capital facility functional or system plans of the City of Bremerton or other service providers were reviewed for inventories, levels of service, planned facilities, growth forecasts, and potential funding. • Growth Forecasts. Population and job growth forecasts were allocated to Bremerton through the Countywide Planning Policies for Kitsap County (Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council, 2015). The 2015 population as well as the 2021 (six-year) and 2036 population (20 -year) growth for each facility provider is estimated. Revenue Forecasts. Revenues were forecasted for Bremerton services to year 2036. The sources of revenue are summarized from available plans and compared to typical revenue sources for those service providers. Growth Management c e ire es GMA requires that all comprehensive plans contain a capital facilities element. GMA specifies that the capital facilities element should consist of: a) an inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities; b) a forecast of the future needs for capital facilities; c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; d) a six-year CFP that will finance capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of existing needs. (RCW 36.70a.070(3)) The GMA requires the CFP to identify specific facilities, include a realistic financing plan (for the six-year period), and make adjustment to the plan if funding is inadequate. Capital facilities are important because they support the growth envisioned in the City's Comprehensive Plan. GMA requires that all capital facilities have "probable funding" to pay for capital facility needs, and that jurisdictions have capital facilities in place and readily available when new development comes in or must be of sufficient capacity when the population grows, particularly for transportation (concurrency) or for services deemed necessary to support development. Levels of service (LOS) are established in the CFP and represent quantifiable measures of capacity. They are minimum standards established by the City to provide capital facilities and services to the Bremerton community at a certain level of quality and within the financial capacity of the City or special district provider. LOS standards are influenced by local citizens, elected and appointed officials, national standards, mandates, and other considerations, such as available funding. Examples of LOS measures include: amount of intersection delay, acres parks or miles of trails per 1,000 population, gallons of water per capita per day, and others. Those facilities and services necessary to support growth should have LOS standards and facilities. Recent Growth Management Hearings Board cases have placed more importance on the preparation and implementation of CFPs. The key points include: • Capital facilities plans should address the 20 -year planning period and be consistent with growth allocations assumed in the Land Use Element. Capital facilities plans should also demonstrate an ability to serve the full city limits and Urban Growth Area (UGA). • Financial plans should address at least a 6 -year period and funding sources should be specific and committed. The City should provide a sense of the funding sources for the 20 -year period though it can be less detailed than for the 6 -year period. Growth, LOS standards, and a funded capital improvement program are to be in balance. In the case where the LOS cannot be met by a particular service or facility, the jurisdiction could do one of the following: 1) add proposed facilities within funding resources, 2) reduce demand through demand management strategies, 3) lower LOS standards, 4) phase growth, or 5) change the land use plan. Definition ofCapital aci i ies Capital facilities generally have a long useful life and include city and non -city operated infrastructure, buildings, and equipment. Capital facilities planning does not cover regular operation and maintenance, but it does include major repair, rehabilitation, or reconstruction of facilities. The CFP addresses infrastructure (such as streets, roads, traffic signals, sewer systems, stormwater systems, water systems, parks, etc.) and public facilities through which services are offered (such as fire protection structures and major equipment, law enforcement structures, schools, etc.). According to WAC 365-196-415, at a minimum, those capital facilities to be included in an inventory and analysis are water systems, sewer systems, stormwater systems, schools, parks and recreation facilities, police facilities and fire facilities. GMA requires that a Utilities Element address the "general location, proposed location, and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities, including, but not limited to, electrical lines, telecommunication lines, and natural gas lines." Section 5 of this City Services Appendix addresses the required inventory and description of power, gas, and telecommunication services. Definition iliies Utilities are the facilities that serve the public through collecting, transmitting, distributing, and processing various services (WAC 365-196-210). These utilities can include natural gas, electricity, telecommunications, water, and sewage services. Principles1.3 Key ' There are two main guiding elements behind the capital facilities planning: fiscal policies and the GMA. These principles interact to guide capital investment. FacilitiesIIIServices Exhibit 1 summarizes the facilities and services addressed in this appendix including the service, provider, and applicable plans considered in this appendix. Exhibit 1. Facilities and Services addressed in City Services Appendix ®® ®® ill `®® Fire and Emergency Bremerton Fire Provides facilities that support the Services Department provision of fire and emergency services. Law Enforcement Bremerton Police Provides facilities that support the Department provision of law enforcement services. Parks Bremerton Parks & Provides facilities for passive and • Parks, Recreation Recreation active recreational activities. and Open Space Plan, Department City of Bremerton, Adopted March 19, 2014 Streets / Bremerton Public Provides streets, sidewalks, traffic • See Transportation Transportation Works & Utilities controls, and street lighting. Appendix under Department separate cover. Sewer / Wastewater Bremerton Public Provides facilities used in collection, • 2014 Wastewater Works & Utilities transmission, storage, treatment or Comprehensive Plan Department discharge of waterborne waste Update, City of within most developed portions of Bremerton and HDR, city and some surrounding Final December 2014 unincorporated areas. Stormwater Bremerton Public Provides facilities that collect and • City of Bremerton Management Works & Utilities transport stormwater runoff. Stormwater Department Management Program, 2014 • Ord.4454 • BMC 15.04 Water Bremerton Public Provides supply of potable water • Water System Plan Works & Utilities from system of surface water and Update 2012, City of Department wells. Service area includes Bremerton developed portions of city and Department of Public surrounding unincorporated areas. Works & Utilities and Utility also contracts to provide KPFF, June 2013 water to additional areas. 1.5 Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Plan The Capital Facilities Plan relies on the policies set forth in the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan as a baseline for studying capital planning needs. The future land use plan and the comprehensive plan population assumptions drive future development in the City, which impacts levels of service and determines capacity needs for services provided by city and non -city providers. Exhibit 2 lists the population assumptions for the 6 and 20 -year planning horizon years for both the city limits and the UGA. If UGAs were to annex to the City the UGA population would be added to the City's population. See the Land Use appendix documenting the City's 2012-2036 growth targets and estimates. These have been adjusted for a 2015 base year in this City Services appendix. The status of UGA allocations and capacities is found in Section 6 of this Appendix. Schools Bremerton School Provides elementary and secondary • Bremerton School District facilities for instruction in the District 100-C Study several branches of learning and and Survey, 2012 study required by the Basic • Kitsap County Capital Education Code of the State of Facilities Plan, 2012 Washington. Electrical Utilities Puget Sound Energy Provides supply of electrical power • 2013 Integrated through transmission lines. Resource Plan Natural Gas Cascade Natural Gas Provides supply of natural gas from • 2014 Cascade interstate pipelines from Natural Gas production areas in the Rocky Integrated Resource Mountains and western Canada. Plan Telecommunication Qwest Corporation Provides transmission of System (Century Link QC) information through telephone, provides telephone radio, cellular telephone, and cable service. KPUD provides television. wholesale broadband internet access. Comcast provides cable television services. Cellular services are provided by a variety of national and regional carriers 1.5 Relationship to the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Plan The Capital Facilities Plan relies on the policies set forth in the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan as a baseline for studying capital planning needs. The future land use plan and the comprehensive plan population assumptions drive future development in the City, which impacts levels of service and determines capacity needs for services provided by city and non -city providers. Exhibit 2 lists the population assumptions for the 6 and 20 -year planning horizon years for both the city limits and the UGA. If UGAs were to annex to the City the UGA population would be added to the City's population. See the Land Use appendix documenting the City's 2012-2036 growth targets and estimates. These have been adjusted for a 2015 base year in this City Services appendix. The status of UGA allocations and capacities is found in Section 6 of this Appendix. Exhibit 2. Bremerton Population Assumptions. 2015 - 2036 2015 39,410 9,579 2021 42,985 10,559 2036 53,407 13,473 Note: Population numbers are estimated using a base year of 2012, when Bremerton had a population of 39,650. The 2015 population for the City of Bremerton is an estimate from Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM). The UGA estimate for 2015 is a straight-line estimate from a 2012 estimate of 9,123 (US Census blocks and permit basis). The net change growth is based on estimates developed by the County and City in prior planning efforts in 2012, and is similar to and slightly higher than the City's net growth target in the Countywide Planning Policies to demonstrate the City's ability to serve the target and have a conservative estimate of growth to avoid under planning. The UGA estimate is based on growth targets and the County's land capacity analysis for its Comprehensive Plan and zoning as of 2015. The status of UGA allocations and capacities is found in Section 6 of this Appendix. Source: BERK, 2015; OFM, 2015. 1.6 Foundation Documents cReference) The documents used for preparation of the CFP are the capital facility and capital improvement plans prepared routinely by the City of Bremerton, which are required for obtaining funding. The following documents are incorporated by reference: • Bremerton's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) provides a planned and programmed approach to efficient utilization of the City's resources while meeting local service and infrastructure needs. (2016 - 2021 Capital Improvement Plan, 2015). • In addition, any functional plans for service areas are also reviewed and incorporated by reference into this document. See Exhibit 1. 0 ('V!kjV''u The revenue analysis of the Capital Facility Plan supports the financing for providing facilities and services, as required by RCW 36.70A.070(3)(d). Revenue estimates, using assumptions that are based on historical trends, were used to represent a realistic expectations for revenue that may be available for capital funding. This revenue analysis looks at Bremerton's capital facilities revenues for those services provided by the City of Bremerton. Through recognizing the fiscal constraints, project prioritization can be incorporated into the capital planning process. The revenue analysis provides an approximate, and not exact, forecast of future revenue sources. The numbers projected in this analysis are for planning purposes and cannot account for sensitivities such as local, state and federal policy, economic trends, and other factors. 2.2 Funding the Capital Facility Estimated future revenues have been projected for the Plan's 2016-2036 time period in year of expenditure dollars (YOE$). The revenue analysis is grouped according to the following categories: • Dedicated Capital Revenues. Dedicated revenues are required by law to be used for certain types of capital spending. Dedicated capital revenues in Bremerton include grants and General Facility Charges. • General Capital Revenues. Those revenues under the category of general capital revenues are required by law to be used for capital projects. The general capital revenues in Bremerton include Real Estate Excise Tax I and 11. Potential Policy Options and Other Funding Sources. There are policy tools and other sources available to fund capital projects. Revenues highlighted in the analysis are used to fund maintenance and operations of existing capital facilities or to construct new ones. However, when funding cannot keep pace with operations and maintenance, Bremerton must make decisions about whether to construct new capital or to lower level of service standards. The analysis attempts to create as realistic of a picture as possible, basing assumptions on historical data and stated City policy. The Bremerton revenue analysis is based on the following assumptions. Annexation. The City of Bremerton is considering annexing its associated Urban Growth Area (UGA), but it is uncertain when the annexation would occur. For this reason, the revenue model assumes two distinct scenarios, which evaluate the outcomes of two possible future growth alternatives. The annexation assumptions are: • The City of Bremerton maintains the same boundary now through the 2036 planning horizon, without annexing any additional unincorporated areas. • The City of Bremerton annexes its associated Urban Growth Areas — Gorst UGA, West Bremerton UGA, and East Bremerton UGA in 2016, the first year of the analysis. • Real Estate Excise Tax (REET). The revenue model assumes growth in the assessed value of real estate. • Escalation Rate of Assessed Values. Given that Bremerton's total assessed value has been flat or declined over the last seven years, going up approximately 2.0 percent in 2015, this analysis assumes that real estate assessed values increase at an annual rate of 1.0 percent going forward. • Turnover Rate of Properties. Since REET is based on the total value of real estate transactions in a given year, the amount of REET revenues a city receives can vary substantially from year to year based on the normal fluctuations in the real estate market. During years when the real estate market is active, revenues are higher, and during softer real estate markets, revenues are lower. For the purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that 5.0% of residential property and 3.5 percent of commercial property turn over in any given year. Transportation Benefit District. The City of Bremerton, by authority of the state, established a Transportation Benefit District (TBD) to fund capital improvement of city streets and transportation projects. Improvements funded by the TBD must be consistent with local and regional transportation plans and required for economic development. The City of Bremerton began collecting a $20 vehicle license fee by the authority of the Transportation Benefit District in December of 2011. The fee is collected by the Washington State Department of Licensing on vehicles that qualify and the funds are used for operations of the district and improvements consistent with existing transportation plans (Resolution No. 005, 2011). This analysis, however, assumes no additional car tab fee revenues allocated to capital, since the use of the fees collected is dependent on the work plan that is approved by the Transportation Benefit District Board. As such, the fees are only approved for a six year period and there is no policy for allocating a portion of vehicle license fee revenues to capital spending. (Johnson, 2015) See also Section 2.8 which identifies some additional funding authority the City may exercise with the TBD. Enterprise Capital Funds. Beginning in 2012, utility funds collected through customer rate charges were split into an operation and maintenance fund and a capital fund in order to monitor operation and maintenance costs separately from Capital Improvement Program costs. The rate revenue collected that is designated for capital is a transfer from the operating fund and the amount transferred is the fund balance in excess of the 12% reserve balance. (Johnson, 2015) It is important to note that the assumptions being used for this revenue analysis may not align with the City's budget assumptions regarding the same sources of revenue. The assumptions differ because the purposes of the two analyses are different: the purpose of the City' budget is to estimate how much money the City will have available to spend in the coming fiscal year; the purpose of this CFP revenue analysis is to estimate how much money the City is likely to receive in total over the next six and twenty years. Transportation Grants Grants are an important funding source for transportation capital projects; however, these funds are distributed in a competitive process which makes it difficult to determine future grant funding levels. Because jurisdictions are feeling the squeeze that outside forces are putting on their capital funding programs, they are competing for, and relying more on, grants. As more jurisdictions compete, however, securing grant funding becomes more difficult. State TransportationGrants State grants are primarily funded with the state -levied portion of the Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax (MVFT). There have been voter -approved increases in the state MVFT, which is based on a complex reimbursement formula that relies on road miles within the jurisdiction. Most of the funds from the increases are earmarked for specific transportation projects throughout the State and local jurisdictions like Bremerton have not seen noticeable increases in average revenues. The latest increase to the MVFT was in 2015, when a 7 cent increase raised the total state MVFT, with another 4.9 cent increase expected in July of 2016 (Gas Tax Increases by 7 Cents in Washington State, 2015). For this revenue analysis, recent historical state grant revenue trends were considered. However, since grant funding is consistently unpredictable, future revenue estimates are conservative. Bremerton received state transportation grants in 2014 and 2015, while in years 2010 through 2013 there were no state grants received for transportation. Federal s a i is Federal transportation grants are funded through the federal portion of the fuel excise tax. The federal gas tax rate has fluctuated between 18.3 cents and 18.4 cents per gallon since 1994. The majority of these funds are deposited into the Highway Trust Fund and disbursed to the states through the Highway and Mass Transit Accounts. As with the state grants, these funds are distributed in a competitive process, making it difficult to determine future grant funding levels. Assumptions: Revenues for total federal and state grants are estimated on a per capita basis on the assumption that over time jurisdictions will generally receive its "fair share" of available grant revenues. Given that state grant funding has not been very present in recent years, the model assumes $45 of grant revenue per capita, growing at 3 percent annually (consistent with the current 5 -year historical average for both state and federal grants). Exhibit 3 shows the total state and federal historical grant revenues to the left of the dotted line, and projected revenues to the right of the dotted line. An average annual dollar amount is assumed in each year for this analysis. However, in reality these dollars will vary greatly from year-to-year and will likely resemble the trend of peaks and valleys shown in historical data. While using an annual average does not fully represent the City's future receipt of grant dollars, it approximates how many total dollars may be received over the study period. Exhibit 3. Annual Bremerton Transportation Grant Revenues Allocated for Capital Projects (2010 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) $ 5.0 M $ 4.5 M $ 4.0 M $3.5M $ 3.0 M $2.5M $ 2.0 M $ 1.5 M $ 1.0 M $0.5M 0.0 M.p..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................rv...............................rv..............................................................rv...............................1 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 4 summarizes projected revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 4. P Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Approximately $63 million could potentially be available for transportation -related capital projects over the next 20 years, including the 2015 beginning fund balance of $463,000 (see Exhibit 5). This beginning fund balance amount only includes balances from the Transportation Benefit District and the Washington Avenue Capital Project Fund since other balances are expected to be spent in 2015 (Johnson, 2015). Exhibit 5. Projected Dedicated Transportation Revenues Allocated for Capital (2016 — 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. SEPA Mitigation ees The City has authority under the State Environmental Policy Act to address traffic impacts and require mitigation measures as development occurs. No fees have been collected in the last five years for SEPA mitigation. The City of Bremerton has determined mitigation in advance with the Planned Action Ordinance adopted for the Puget Sound Industrial Center -Bremerton. The cost of all local road improvements deemed related to growth was $25,765,000 in 2012 dollars. Each development project is responsible for a proportionate share of its trips on the road system. However, the fee charged per trip is only 20% of the total estimated costs of local improvements at $1,126 in 2012 dollars.' Thus the City would need to find other resources to help implement the new improvements. Parks is Revenues for parks capital projects and acquisitions generally come from state and federal grants, and sometimes donations. State grants generally come from the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO) and make up the largest of these three sources. Assumptions. Since parks grants are competed for on a state or national level, this analysis estimates these revenues on a per capita basis on the assumption that over time a jurisdiction will generally receive its "fair share" of available grant revenues. Over the last six years, Bremerton has received around $18.50 per capita in combined grant and donation revenues. Given large fluctuations from year to year, a value of $10 per capita was used in order to project potential future grant revenues using a conservative assumption, with no additional annual growth. Exhibit 6 shows historical revenues to the left of the dotted line and estimated future revenues to the right of the dotted line. An average annual dollar amount is assumed in each year for this analysis. In reality, annual revenues will vary greatly and are likely to resemble the trend of the peaks and valleys shown in historical data. While using an annual average does not fully represent Bremerton's future receipt of grant dollars, it approximates how many total dollars may be received over the study period. ' The fee may be escalated with the Consumer Price Index. Exhibit 6. Annual Bremerton Parks Grants and Donations Revenues (2010 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) $ 1.8 M $1.6M $ 1.4 M $1.2M 1..0 M 0.8 M $ 0.6 M $ 0.4 M $ 0.2 M 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 7 summarizes projected revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 7. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Including the 2015 fund balance of $133,000, approximately $9.8 million could potentially be available for parks -related capital projects over the next 20 years (see Exhibit 8). Exhibit 8. Projected Dedicated Parks Revenues Allocated for Capital (2016 — 2036 YOE$) Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Wastewater The City of Bremerton provides sewer services, as required by state and federal law. Prior to 2012, capital improvements were included in the overall Wastewater Utility Fund; currently, the City splits the utility funds into an Operations and Maintenance fund and a Capital Fund. The Wastewater Capital Fund provides for the planning, engineering, labor, material, equipment, and overhead costs related to construction of wastewater capital facilities and improvements. Typically, utilities use the following resources to fund capital improvements: • Grants; • General Facility Charges; • Accumulated capital cash reserves and interest earnings; • Transfers from the Operations and Maintenance Fund, if needed; also called rate funded system re- investment (funded by rate revenues paid by utility account customers); • Loans; • Bond financing. Grants, General Facility Charges, and certain level of operating transfers represent dedicated capital revenues. The other funding sources are used on as needed basis, depending on the type and magnitude of capital project needs and capital funding shortfalls in a given year. For this reason, this analysis focuses on dedicated capital revenue estimates in this portion of the document. Bremerton receives federal and state grants to help fund sewer capital projects. These grants are project -specific and therefore do not occur on a regular basis. In the time frame for which historical revenues were available for this analysis (2010-2014), the City received federal grants for four years and state grants for one year. Assumptions. The 5 -year historical average for wastewater grant revenues is $30 per capita; however, 2010 grant revenues were significantly higher than in other years. Estimated future wastewater grant revenues are based on an assumption that Bremerton will continue to generate similar per capita revenues to 2011-2015 average (excluding 2010, which was an outlier year), which is approximately $4.00 per capita. This model assumes grant revenues will grow at a rate of 3 percent annually. Exhibit 9 shows historical revenues to the left of the dotted line and estimated future revenues to the right of the dotted line. Although this analysis estimates revenues as an annual average, grants will be received intermittently on a project -specific basis. Exhibit 9. Annual Bremerton Wastewater Grants Revenues (2010 — 2026 YOE$, in millions) $ 7.0 MI $ 6.0 I $ 5.0 MI $ 4.0, MI $ 3.0 MI $ 2.0 MI $ 1.0 MI 20,10, 2012 2014 2016 2018 20,20, 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 10 summarizes estimated revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 10. Pro Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Wastewater aFacility Charges The City of Bremerton collects General Facility Charges (GFC) on all new or expanded service connections to the wastewater utility system. GFC, as provided for by Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35.92.025, refers to a one-time charge imposed on new customers as a condition of connection to the utility system. The purpose of the connection charge is two -fold: to promote equity between new and existing customers and to provide a source of revenue to fund capital projects. Revenue can only be used to fund utility capital projects or to pay debt service incurred to finance those projects. The GFCs are in addition to all normal application and installation fees. Assumptions. The 5 -year historical average for wastewater General Facility Charges was approximately $357,000 annually, or $9 per capita annually. Going forward, the model assumes $9 per capita growing at an annual growth rate of 3 percent. Exhibit 11 shows historical wastewater GFCs to the left of the dotted line and estimated future revenues to the right. An average annual dollar amount is assumed in each year for this analysis. However, actual revenues in any given year will likely exhibit some peaks and valleys. Exhibit 11. Annual Bremerton Wastewater General Facility Charges (2010 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) $ 0.5 M $ 0.4 t'V!1 i $0.3M $ 0.2 M V i $0.1M $ 0..0n 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 12 summarizes projected revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 12. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Starting in 2012, when the City of Bremerton created separate operations and maintenance and capital funds, the City began to transfer funds annually from Operations and Maintenance Fund to Capital Improvement Fund. These transfers ensure system integrity and preservation through reinvestment in capital projects. For this reason, operating transfers are also called rate funded system re -investment. The City has a policy that any balance in the Operations and Maintenance Fund in excess of the 12 percent target reserve requirement would be available for capital expenditures. Since revenue from customer utility rates drives the amount of annual operating transfers to capital, it is difficult to estimate how much may be available for any given year. The City periodically conducts comprehensive cost -of -service evaluation of its utilities to determine whether any adjustments to current rates are needed to ensure each customer class pays their equitable share of the wastewater system costs. The results of this study are reflected in the customer utility rates, and may affect the total amounts of operating transfers to capital. Assumptions. The City's 2013 Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Utilities Rate Study assumed annual funding for wastewater system reinvestment being phased -in, starting at $800,000 in 2013 and gradually increasing to $1.3 million in 2018. The model mirrors these assumptions until 2018, growing the 2018 estimate at an annual growth rate of 3 percent thereafter. Exhibit 13 shows historical operating transfers to the left of the dotted line and estimated future transfers to the right. Since Capital Improvement Fund was created in 2012, the chart excludes that year. An average annual dollar amount is assumed in each year for this analysis. However, actual revenues in any given year will likely exhibit some peaks and valleys. Exhibit 13. Annual Bremerton Wastewater Operating Transfers (2013 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) �i $ 0.5 M $0.0M 2013 2015 2017. 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 14 summarizes projected revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 14. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Total Estimated a icae Wastewater eve e Exhibit 15 shows total estimated dedicated revenues available for wastewater capital projects over the planning period, including grants, General Facility Charges, and operating transfers. Additionally, Bremerton has a 2015 fund balance of about $2.9 million in its wastewater Capital Fund. These funds are also available to cover wastewater projects during the 2016 — 2036 period. Exhibit 15. Projected Dedicated Wastewater Revenues Allocated for Capital, (2016-2036 YOE$) Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. ►ter° The City of Bremerton provides water services, as required by state and federal law. Prior to 2012, capital improvements were included in the overall Water Utility Fund; currently, the City splits the utility funds into an Operations and Maintenance fund and a Capital Fund. The Water Capital Fund provides for the planning, engineering, labor, material, equipment, and overhead costs related to construction of wastewater capital facilities and improvements. Similar to the Wastewater Utility, the Water utility uses the following resources to fund capital improvements: • Grants; • General Facility Charges; • Accumulated capital cash reserves and interest earnings; • Transfers from the Operations and Maintenance Fund, if needed; also called rate funded system re- investment (funded by rate revenues paid by utility account customers); • Loans; • Bond financing. Grants and General Facility Charges represent dedicated capital revenues. The other funding sources are used on as needed basis, depending on the type and magnitude of capital project needs and capital funding shortfalls in a given year. For this reason, we focus on dedicated capital revenue estimates in this portion of the document. Bremerton receives federal and state grants to help fund water system capital projects. These grants are project -specific and therefore do not occur on a regular basis. In the time frame for which historical revenues were available for this analysis (2010-2014), the City only received three years of federal grants and one year of state grants. Assumptions. The 5 -year historical average for water grant revenues is $27 per capita; however, 2012 grant revenues were significantly higher than in other years. Estimated future water grant revenues are based on an assumption that Bremerton will continue to generate similar per capita revenues to 2010- 2011 average (excluding 2010 grants as an outlier year), which is approximately $3.00 per capita. This model assumes grant revenues will grow at a rate of 3 percent annually. Exhibit 16 shows historical revenues to the left of the dotted line and estimated future revenues to the right of the dotted line. Although this analysis estimates revenues as an annual average, grants will be received intermittently on a project -specific basis. Exhibit 16. Annual Bremerton Water Grant Revenues (2010 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) $ 7.0 M $6.OM $ 5.0 M $ 4.0 M $ 3.0 M $ 2.0 M $ 1.0 M $ 0.0 M 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 17 summarizes estimated revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 17 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Water a is Facilities Fees The City of Bremerton collects General Facility Charges (GFC) on all new or expanded service connections to the water utility system. GFC, as provided for by Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35.92.025, refers to a one-time charge imposed on new customers as a condition of connection to the utility system. The purpose of the connection charge is two -fold: to promote equity between new and existing customers and to provide a source of revenue to fund capital projects. Revenue can only be used to fund utility capital projects or to pay debt service incurred to finance those projects. The GFCs are in addition to all normal application and installation fees. Assumptions. The 5 -year historical average for water General Facility Charges was approximately $390,000 annually, or $11 per capita. Going forward, the model assumes $10 per capita growing at an annual growth rate of 3 percent. Exhibit 18 shows historical water GFCs to the left of the dotted line and estimated future revenues to the right. An average annual dollar amount is assumed in each year for this analysis. However, actual revenues in any given year will likely exhibit some peaks and valleys. Exhibit 18. Annual Bremerton Water General Facility Charges (2010 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) C�* $ 0.2 PQM Ml M M $0.0M M 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 19 summarizes projected revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 19. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Operating Transfers Starting in 2012, when the City of Bremerton created separate operations and maintenance and capital funds, the City began to transfer funds annually from Operations and Maintenance Fund to Capital Improvement Fund. These transfers ensure system integrity and preservation through reinvestment in capital projects. For this reason, operating transfers are also called rate funded system re -investment. The City has a policy that any balance in the Operations and Maintenance Fund in excess of the 12 percent target reserve requirement would be available for capital expenditures. Since revenue from customer utility rates drives the amount of annual operating transfers to capital, it is difficult to estimate how much may be available for any given year. The City periodically conducts comprehensive cost -of -service evaluation of its utilities to determine whether any adjustments to current rates are needed to ensure each customer class pays their equitable share of the water system costs. The results of this study are reflected in the customer utility rates, and may affect the total amounts of operating transfers to capital. Assumptions. The City's 2013 Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Utilities Rate Study assumed annual funding for water system reinvestment being phased -in, starting at $250,000 in 2014 and gradually increasing to $1 million in 2018. The model mirrors these assumptions until 2018, growing the 2018 estimate at an annual growth rate of 3 percent thereafter. Exhibit 20 shows historical operating transfers to the left of the dotted line and estimated future transfers to the right. Since Capital Improvement Fund was created in 2012, the chart excludes that year. An average annual dollar amount is assumed in each year for this analysis. However, actual revenues in any given year will likely exhibit some peaks and valleys. Exhibit 20. Annual Bremerton Water Operating Transfers (2013 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) 1.8 M 2018 2015. 2017 2019. 2021 2023 2025 2027. 2029 2031 2033 2035 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 21 summarizes estimated revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 21. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 22 shows total estimated dedicated revenues available for water capital projects over the planning period, including grants, General Facility Charges, and operating transfers. Additionally, Bremerton has a 2015 fund balance of about $1.0 million in its water capital fund. These funds are also available to cover water projects during the 2016 — 2036 period. Exhibit 22. Total Projected Dedicated Water Revenues Allocated For Capital (2016 — 2036 YOE$) Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Stormwater The City of Bremerton provides stormwater management services, as required by state and federal law. The program identifies, prevents and manages the impacts of development on water runoff. The negative impacts that stormwater programs manage include flooding, erosion, pollution, and low stream flows. Prior to 2012, capital improvements were included in the overall Wastewater Utility Fund; currently, the City splits the utility funds into an Operations and Maintenance fund and a Capital Fund. The Stormwater Capital Fund provides for the planning, engineering, labor, material, equipment, and overhead costs related to construction of stormwater capital facilities and improvements. Similar to Wastewater and Water utilities, the Stormwater utility uses the following resources to fund capital improvements: • Grants; • General Facility Charges; • Accumulated capital cash reserves and interest earnings; • Transfers from the Operations and Maintenance Fund, if needed; also called rate funded system re- investment (funded by rate revenues paid by utility account customers); • Loans; • Bond financing. Grants and General Facility Charges represent dedicated capital revenues. The other funding sources are used on as needed basis, depending on the type and magnitude of capital project needs and capital funding shortfalls in a given year. For this reason, we focus on dedicated capital revenue estimates in this portion of the document. r Bremerton receives federal and state grants to help fund stormwater system capital projects. These grants are project -specific and therefore do not occur on a regular basis. In the time frame for which historical revenues were available for this analysis (2010-2014), the City only received three years of federal grants and one year of state grants. Assumptions. The 5 -year historical average for stormwater grant revenues is $12.50 per capita. To be conservative, the assumption for estimated future water grant revenues is $12 per capita. This model assumes grant revenues will grow at a rate of 3 percent annually. Exhibit 23 shows historical revenues to the left of the dotted line and estimated future revenues to the right of the dotted line. Although this analysis estimates revenues as an annual average, grants will be received intermittently on a project -specific basis. Exhibit 23. Annual Bremerton Stormwater Grant Revenues (2010 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) $ 1.4 M $ 1.2 M $ 1.0 M $ 0.8 M $ 0.6 M $ 0.4 M $ 0.2 M $ 0.0 M 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 24 summarizes projected revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 24. Projected Stormwater Grant Revenues (2016 — 2036 YOE$) Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. The City of Bremerton collects General Facility Charges (GFC) on all new or expanded service connections to the stormwater utility system. GFC, as provided for by Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 35.92.025, refers to a one-time charge imposed on new customers as a condition of connection to the utility system. The purpose of the connection charge is two -fold: to promote equity between new and existing customers and to provide a source of revenue to fund capital projects. Revenue can only be used to fund utility capital projects or to pay debt service incurred to finance those projects. The GFCs are in addition to all normal application and installation fees. Assumptions. The 5 -year historical average for stormwater General Facility Charges was approximately $68,000 annually, or $1.69 per capita. Going forward, the model assumes $1.00 per capita growing at an annual growth rate of 3 percent. Exhibit 25 shows historical stormwater GFCs to the left of the dotted line and estimated future revenues to the right. An average annual dollar amount is assumed in each year for this analysis. However, actual revenues in any given year will likely exhibit some peaks and valleys. Exhibit 25. Annual Bremerton Stormwater General Facility Charges (2010 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) $0.1M SII IIII $0.1M $0.1M $0.1M $ 0.0 M $ 0.0 M IIII IIII IIII IIII IIII IVI 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026 2028 2030 2032 2034 2036 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 26 summarizes projected revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Exhibit 26. Pro Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Operating a s s Starting in 2012, when the City of Bremerton created separate operations and maintenance and capital funds, the City began to transfer funds annually from Operations and Maintenance Fund to Capital Improvement Fund. These transfers ensure system integrity and preservation through reinvestment in capital projects. For this reason, operating transfers are also called rate funded system re -investment. The City has a policy that any balance in the Operations and Maintenance Fund in excess of the 12 percent target reserve requirement would be available for capital expenditures. Since revenue from customer utility rates drives the amount of annual operating transfers to capital, it is difficult to estimate how much may be available for any given year. The City periodically conducts comprehensive cost -of -service evaluation of its utilities to determine whether any adjustments to current rates are needed to ensure each customer class pays their equitable share of the stormwater system costs. The results of this study are reflected in the customer utility rates, and may affect the total amounts of operating transfers to capital. Assumptions. The City's 2013 Water, Wastewater, and Stormwater Utilities Rate Study assumed annual funding for stormwater system reinvestment being phased -in, starting at $20,000 in 2014 and gradually increasing to $80,000 in 2018. The model mirrors these assumptions until 2018, growing the 2018 estimate at an annual growth rate of 3 percent thereafter. Exhibit 27 shows historical operating transfers to the left of the dotted line and estimated future transfers to the right. Since Capital Improvement Fund was created in 2012, the chart excludes that year. An average annual dollar amount is assumed in each year for this analysis. However, actual revenues in any given year will likely exhibit some peaks and valleys. Exhibit 27. Annual Bremerton Stormwater Operating Transfers (2013 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) $ 0.3 M 1i $0.2M 0.0 M 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 2029 2031 2033 2035 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 28 summarizes estimated revenues for the planning period as well as two subtotal time periods. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Exhibit 29 shows total estimated dedicated revenues available for stormwater capital projects over the planning period, including grants, General Facility Charges, and operating transfers. Additionally, Bremerton has a 2015 fund balance of about $892,500 in its stormwater capital fund. These funds are also available to cover stormwater projects during the 2016 — 2036 period. Exhibit 29. Total Estimated Dedicated Stormwater Revenues Allocated for Capital Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Real Estate Excise Tax (BEET) Revenues from the Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) are collected at the point of sale of a property and they are required to be spent on capital projects. REET is based on the total value of real estate transactions in a given year, and the amount that Bremerton receives annually can vary significantly based on fluctuations in the real estate market and trends in the economy. For example, during the recession, revenues were noticeably lower while the opposite is true in strong years in the real estate market. Bremerton has the ability to impose up to two REET levies as authorized by state law. REET I and REET II can each collect 0.25 percent on the assessed value of a sale, for a total tax of 0.5 percent of total assessed value. All proceeds from the REET must be used for capital spending as defined in RCW 35.43.040 and which includes only those capital projects listed in the capital facilities plan (BMC 3.84). REET II can only be levied by those cities and counties that are planning under GMA. For REET 11, "capital project" means those projects specifically listed in RCW 82.46.035(5): public works projects of a local government for planning, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, or improvement of streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, bridges, domestic water systems, storm and sanitary sewer systems, and planning, construction, reconstruction, repair, rehabilitation, or improvement of parks. REET II is more restricted than REET I, as it may not be spent on acquisition of land for parks, recreational facilities, law enforcement facilities, fire protection facilities, trails, libraries, or administrative or judicial facilities (Real Estate Excise Tax, 2015; RCW 82.46.035). Within the above parameter, REET I and REET II can be spent at the discretion of the City of Bremerton. A portion of Bremerton's REET revenues are already committed to bond payments, but this analysis estimates that there will be additional revenues to spend for capital purposes. Assumptions. REET revenues are directly related to the sale of real estate. Home sales and home values can fluctuate significantly depending on various other factors of the economy. As such, this analysis assumes annual turnover for residential properties (5 percent) and for commercial properties (3.5 percent). Currently, the largest REET contribution is for the Government Center construction through 2034. Based on conversations with the City, the annual debt service commitment is $367,500 through 2036 (Johnson, 2015). Exhibit 30 shows historical REET revenue to the left of the dotted line and projected revenues to the right of the dotted line. Actual revenues will have some peaks and revenues due to the natural cycles of the real estate market and the economy. Exhibit 30. Annual Bremerton Real Estate Excise Tax Revenues (2010 — 2036 YOE$, in millions) $ 1.0 MI $ 0.9 MI $ 0.8 MI $O.7MI $ 0.6 MI $0.5MI $ 0.4 MI $ 0.3 MI $ 0.2 M $ 0.1 MI $ 0.0 MI Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015 Exhibit 31 shows the estimated total REET revenues for the next six years and for the 20 -year planning horizon (2016 — 2036). In 2015, REET I and REET II had a balance of $653,000, which is also available for general capital spending during the planning period. As mentioned above, some of the REET revenues are dedicated to paying off existing debt service payments and are not available for future projects. Exhibit 31. P Estimated Revenues Amount Committed to Debt Service Available Revenues Bremerton Real Estate Excise Tax Revenues (2016 — 2036 YOE$ Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. $3,920,000 $12,050,000 $15,970,000 $16,622,930 $2, 205, 000 $5,51Z500 $1,715,000 $6,537,500 $7,717,500 $8,252,500 $7,717,500 $8,905,430 2.6Total Capital Revenues Exhibit 32 summarizes projected total capital revenues available over the planning period, including fund balances. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015 Impacts2.7 Timing and magnitude of annexation will have an impact on Bremerton's total available capital revenues. The analysis above (summarized in Exhibit 32) assumes that there will be no annexations and the city boundary will remain constant through 2036. Exhibit 33 shows a planning -level estimate of Bremerton's potential capital revenues if all UGAs are annexed in 2016. The analysis below does not account for annexations occurring in different stages, or in later years. Exhibit 33. Projected Total Bremerton Capital Revenues for 2016 Annexation of UGA Areas (2016 — 2036 YOES) 2.8 Policy This section describes policy and funding options that are available to the City of Bremerton outside of the dedicated revenues listed above. The options listed are not necessarily being currently considered by the City, but are included to show a range of options that are available. PolicyChanges to ExistingI r°ces Transportation Benefit District. While the City of Bremerton already has a Transportation Benefit District (TBD) to fund capital improvement of city streets and transportation projects (funded by a $20 dollar vehicle license fee), there is no specific policy for capital spending. Transportation Benefit District Board may set policy direction and could consider dedicating a certain percentage to capital. Recent legislative change also created an opportunity for increasing non -voted vehicle license fee to $50 per vehicle. Sales Tax. Of the 8.7% sales tax currently collected in the City, a 1% "local" share of the tax accrues to local jurisdictions. The City receives 85% of the 1% local tax and the County receives 15%. This tax is levied on businesses in the area, on construction activity, and on some transactions that are related to housing, such as certain online purchases and telecommunications services. Cities may discretionally use general fund revenues to fund capital improvements. By policy, some cities have chosen to dedicate a portion of their local sales tax toward the construction of their capital needs. All City residents and visitors to the City who make retail purchases within the City limits contribute to this revenue stream. Other. The City could lobby State legislators to restore some of the funding levels once available to local governments for road improvements. Although local jurisdictions receive a certain percentage of collected Motor Vehicle Fuel (MVF) Tax funds, a combination of factors such as decreasing gas prices and a reduction in both vehicle miles driven and vehicle fuel efficiency has resulted in local MVF Tax allocations that are generally not keeping pace with inflation. In order to restore funding levels, the City could encourage legislators to follow the recent gas tax increase with measures that would raise the tax rate alongside cost inflation, and increase the tax rate over time with fuel efficiency improvements. New ISources Transportation Impact Fees. Impact fees are a financing tool that requires new development to pay a portion of the costs associated with infrastructure improvements that are "reasonably related" to that development. The GMA allows agencies to develop and implement a transportation impact fee program to help fund some of the costs of transportation facilities needed to accommodate growth. State law (Chapter 82.02 RCW) requires that impact fees be related to improvements to serve new developments and not existing deficiencies; assessed proportional to the impacts of new developments; allocated for improvements that reasonably benefit new development; and spent on facilities identified in the Capital Facilities Plan. Legally, financing for improvements that will serve the new development must provide a balance between impact fees and other sources of public funds, and the fees must be structured in a manner that ensures that funds collected do not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of improvements reasonably related to new development. The City of Bremerton currently has no transportation impact fees. Park Impact Fees. Similar to transportation impact fees, park impact fees are a financing tool that requires new development to pay a portion of the costs associated with infrastructure improvements that are "reasonably related" to that development. The impact fee must be related to improvements to serve new development and not existing deficiencies; assessed proportional to the impacts of new development; allocated for improvements that reasonably benefit new development; and spent on facilities identified in the Capital Facilities Plan. The City of Bremerton currently has no parks impact fees. Local/Road Improvement Districts. If the City needs additional capital funds, it could consider creating a Local Improvement District (LID) or Road Improvement District (RID). Under these programs, the City has the statutory authority to create a new taxing district. The City has established LIDS for water and sewer, though LIDS could be used in additional locations in the future and for other infrastructure, as appropriate. Within these districts, the City may levy an additional property tax (excess levy) to cover debt service payments on the sale of bonds purchased to finance projects within the district. Revenues may only be applied to local, clearly-defined areas in which the land owners being assessed the additional tax benefit from the funded projects. LIDS may be used for water, sewer, and storm water projects. RIDS may only be used to fund road and street improvements. Other. The City could lobby the State legislature to provide new sources of funding to replace other funding that has been diminished through other state tax initiatives. Prioritization Based on adopted or alternative levels of service presented in Chapter 4 a series of capital projects is proposed for the six-year and 20 -year periods. As described in Chapter 2, dedicated capital funds are limited and there is a gap between dedicated funds and capital costs. Means to fill gaps with other funding sources are described. However, in consideration of limited resources, another means to aligning funds to projects is to prioritize projects around prioritization principles. Transportation prioritization criteria are included in the Transportation Appendix. Discretionary prioritization principles are listed below for non -transportation facilities: • Does the project support the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan Vision? • Does the project support the regionally designated Downtown Center and Puget Sound Industrial Center - Bremerton or the City's Centers Concept? • Does the project implement an approved functional plan? • Are there agreements or other official commitments in place or is a substantial amount of work already complete? • Does the project help complete the existing system in the City or subarea? • Does the project improve the quality of existing facilities • Are long-term sustainable maintenance resources available? • Does a project scope or timing help avoid major maintenance costs down the road? • Does the project require specific windows of partner participation or is it eligible for specific grants? • Does the proposal represent a unique funding opportunity? • Is the project drawing from entrepreneurial opportunity with a long-term capital or program funding stream? • Is the City the best provider of the facility or service? • Is there a substantial benefit in relation to cost of the facility service? • Does the project provide added facilities or services to meet the needs of underserved populations? • Will the project benefit a significant numbers of persons in the community? 2.9Six-Year Cost and Revenue Comparison This section compares Bremerton's dedicated capital facilities revenue sources with its planned project costs for the six-year planning horizon of 2016 — 2021 to understand the difference between future dedicated capital costs and potential future revenues. In most cases, estimated future capital costs are larger than future dedicated capital revenues, which is a trend seen in most cities given the structural and legal limitations on capital funding sources. However, understanding the magnitude of difference can aid the City in planning for ways to fill the gap through other funding methods. This six-year plan will be continually reviewed and updated as a part of the evolving planning process. Annual budget decisions should prioritize needed funding for capital facilities and this summary helps identify how the capital needs of the future can be successfully funded. Estimated Prjec Costs Exhibit 34 provides the capital project costs for each service provider for the six year planning period and estimated costs for the full study period. However, estimated project costs beyond the six-year period were not available for all categories. Costs were adjusted from constant dollars to year of expenditure dollars using an assumed inflation rate of 3 percent annually to align with the revenue projections presented above. Exhibit 3 * Public buildings projects are all Category II projects. They include regularly scheduled and preventative maintenance and security -related projects in general municipal facilities and parking facilities. **The Transportation Appendix includes $488.1 million in expenditures over the 2016-2036 period, expressed in current dollars. The amount includes PSIC-Bremerton costs ($205M) which will be shared among agencies and private development based on the SKIA Subarea Plan (with revenues anticipated to include SEPA mitigation, grants, and state funds). For the purposes of Exhibit 34 in this City Services Appendix, the 20 -year Transportation costs were escalated into year of estimate (YOE$) dollars as follows: 1) Costs were estimated based on an annual average of 20 -year projects beyond the 6 -year TIP. 2) All costs were inflated by an annual 3%. )usands) Note: The Parks and Recreation subtotal column accounts for costs in years 2016 — 2019. The Parks and Recreation total column is based on projects beyond 2020. Source: City of Bremerton, 2014, 2015, 2016; Fehr & Peers, 2015; BERK, 2015 and 2016. Six -Year Capital Cost eve e Comparison is The following section shows how planned project costs compare to estimated capital revenue sources for the six-year planning period between 2016 and 2035. The revenues and costs are both presented in year of expenditure dollars. These exhibits identify the difference between the planned costs and the estimated revenues, including existing fund balances in capital project funds. Note that for all service providers identified, their six- year capital plans have been balanced using non -dedicated revenue sources or bonds. Exhibit 35. Estimated Streets Capital Revenues and Costs (2016 — 2021 YOE$) Dedicated Streets Fund Revenues $12,449,000 2015 Streets Fund Balance Total Streets Funds Available Capital Streets Costs $463,447 $12,912,447 $77,992,378 Estimated Dedicated Funding Surplus/(Deficit) ($65,079,931) Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015 and 2016; Fehr & Peers 2015. There is a deficit of around $65 million between expectations for future dedicated streets capital revenues and estimated capital costs for the six-year planning period. Transportation projects have typically been funded by multiple revenue sources, including transfers from utilities funds and the Transportation Benefit District revenues. Exhibit 36. Estimated Parks and Recreation Capital Revenues and Costs (2016 — 2019 YOE$) * Parks projects were assigned by priority in the 2014 PROS Plan, with those high priority projects expected to take place by 2017 and those medium priority projects expected to be completed by 2019. Of those projects listed to occur between 2014 and 2017, none have been completed to date so it is assumed that high priority projects will occur between 2016 and 2017 and medium priority projects will occur between 2017 and 2019. No specific information on parks projects in the years 2020 and 2021 is available to date. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015; PROS Plan, 2014. The City of Bremerton is considering a policy of allocating 10 percent of REET revenues to parks capital projects; however, this analysis does not account for this potential policy change. Comparing estimated future parks capital revenues and estimated future parks costs over the six-year planning period results in a deficit of $5.1 million. Exhibit 37. Estimated Wastewater Capital Revenues and Costs (2016 — 2021 YOE$) * The project costs used for this analysis are from an April 2016 project list. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015 and 2016; BERK, 2015 and 2016. Expected costs of wastewater projects exceed estimated revenues dedicated to capital projects. However, utility funds operate as enterprises within the City structure, functioning much like private business entities. The Water Capital Fund relies primarily on debt financing, loans, and operating transfers (based on rates) to fund its capital program. See Section Sewer / Wastewater 4.6 for more information on financing wastewater capital projects through 2036. Exhibit 38. Estimated Water Capital Revenues and Costs (2016 — 2021 YOE$) Note: The project costs used for this analysis are from a project list dated April 2016. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015 and 2016; BERK, 2015 and 2016. Expected costs of water projects exceed estimated revenues dedicated to capital projects. However, utility funds operate as enterprises within the City structure, functioning much like private business entities. The Water Capital Fund relies primarily on debt financing, loans, and operating transfers (based on rates) to fund its capital program. See Section Water 4.8 for more information on financing water capital projects through 2036. Exhibit 39. Estimated Stormwater Capital Revenues and Costs (2016 — 2021 YOE$) Dedicated Stormwater Fund Revenues $4,080,000 2015 Stormwater Fund Balance $892,560 Total Stormwater Funds Available $4,972,560 Capital Stormwater Costs $28,935,055 Note: Project cost numbers are subject to change when the 2016 CIP is adopted. The project costs used for this analysis are from a project list in April 2016. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015 and 2016; BERK, 2015 and 2016. Expected costs of stormwater projects exceed estimated revenues dedicated to capital projects. However, utility funds operate as enterprises within the City structure, functioning much like private business entities. The Water Capital Fund relies primarily on debt financing, loans, and operating transfers (based on rates) to fund its capital program. See Section Stormwater 4.7 for more information on financing stormwater capital projects through 2036. Exhibit 40 shows the general capital revenues and costs. Revenues for the general capital fund come from REET. Exhibit 40. Estimated General Capital Revenues and Costs (2016 — 2021 YOE$) This analysis assumes that all REET revenues will be available for capital projects according to REET spending requirements. The City of Bremerton is considering a policy of allocating 10 percent of REET revenues to parks capital projects, but the policy is not yet established and the analysis does not account for this potential policy change. As shown in Exhibit 41, the total difference between the City's estimated capital costs and projected dedicated capital revenues over the six-year planning period is $199 million. Exhibit 41. Total Dedicated Capital Revenues and Costs (2016 -2021 YOE$ Total Dedicated Capital Funds $48,148,822 Total Capital Needed $ $247,405,335 TOTAL DEDICATED CAPITAL FUNDS SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) ( - $199,256,514) Note: Some project cost numbers are subject to change when the 2016 CIP is adopted. Source: City of Bremerton, 2015 and 2016; BERK, 2015 and 2016. The difference between Bremerton's total estimated six-year capital costs and six-year dedicated capital revenues represents the structural difference between incoming dedicated capital revenues and planned capital expenditures over the six-year planning period, and does not reflect the City's likely future cash flow for ability to pay. It does, however, represent the City's estimated ability to pay using specifically those revenues dedicated to capital projects. However, there are tools beyond the dedicated revenue streams with which to fund capital projects, such as reprioritization of operating revenues and its unused debt capacity. General funding information for service providers other than the City of Bremerton summarized in Section 3.0 such as the Bremerton School District. Power and telecommunication services provided by Puget Sound Energy, Cascade Natural Gas, and Century Link QC and addressed in Section 5.0. 3.1 Inventory An inventory for each service provider is provided in Section 4.0 for each capital facility and utility service provider. 3.2 Levels of Service The CFP lays out the level of service (LOS) consequences of growth for the City through 2036. LOS consequences are summarized for each facility reviewed. Exhibit 42 shows the LOS consequences for each facility, with the first column showing the service or facility type that is provided currently as of 2015 and the second column showing the current adopted LOS. The 2016 — 2036 Adjusted LOS shows what LOS standard the City would need to adopt to continue to meet its standard through 2036, based on growth assumed by the preferred alternative. The 2016 — 2036 LOS Policy column describes the service level the City or special district has adopted by policy and can fund during the planning period. Where appropriate, the Policy LOS distinguishes a Base LOS—the LOS that can be afforded within financial means — and a Target LOS where the City anticipates seeking other funding sources (e.g. grants) or partnerships and has a vision for a higher LOS should funding allow. 3.3 Projects A project list for each service provider is detailed in the inventory section for each capital facility and utility service provider. The project list includes summaries of six-year capital plans, and where available, capital projects for the 2021-2036 planning period. 3.4 UGA SIS Bremerton is assigned to the West Bremerton UGA, East Bremerton UGA, and Gorst UGA, though there are no active annexation proposals at this time. However, there is a realistic possibility that the UGA areas will be annexed during the 20 year planning period. As such, the UGA area growth numbers are identified in isolation from the existing city boundaries of Bremerton so that the activity likely to occur there can be considered regardless of when, or if, the UGA areas are annexed. The City has conducted an analysis of most future Annexation areas individually and collectively, and these studies are included as appropriate. These studies include, but are not limited to: • Fiscal Impacts of West Bremerton UGA and Gorst UGA Annexation, BERK Consulting, Final August 5, 2015 • Gorst Subarea Plan, City of Bremerton and Kitsap County, December 2013 In addition, the City has analyzed UGAs in the following Capital Facility Plans: • Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, City of Bremerton, Adopted March 19, 2014 • 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, City of Bremerton and HDR, Final December 2014 • Water System Plan Update 2012, City of Bremerton Department of Public Works & Utilities and KPFF, June 2013 2036, plan for 1,600 Sq. Ft. per 1,000 population. Sewer • 100 gallons per capita per day (gpcpd), City • 71 gallons per person per day and 35 gallons Services Element per employee per day • 71 gallons per person per day and 35 gallons per employee per day, Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014 Stormwater • Maintain per King County Stormwater • Maintain per Ecology Stormwater standards, City Services Element Management Manual for Western Washington • See BMC 15.04.020, Ecology, Kitsap or equivalent as determined by BMC 15.04.020 County, and other manuals and standards referenced Water • 157 gallons per equivalent residential unit • An ERU (equivalent residential unit) of 200 average 2006-2011, Water System Plan, gallons, with a stated goal of 180 gallons 2012 Source: City Services Appendix, 2004; BERK, 2013; BERK, 2015 and 2016. 3.3 Projects A project list for each service provider is detailed in the inventory section for each capital facility and utility service provider. The project list includes summaries of six-year capital plans, and where available, capital projects for the 2021-2036 planning period. 3.4 UGA SIS Bremerton is assigned to the West Bremerton UGA, East Bremerton UGA, and Gorst UGA, though there are no active annexation proposals at this time. However, there is a realistic possibility that the UGA areas will be annexed during the 20 year planning period. As such, the UGA area growth numbers are identified in isolation from the existing city boundaries of Bremerton so that the activity likely to occur there can be considered regardless of when, or if, the UGA areas are annexed. The City has conducted an analysis of most future Annexation areas individually and collectively, and these studies are included as appropriate. These studies include, but are not limited to: • Fiscal Impacts of West Bremerton UGA and Gorst UGA Annexation, BERK Consulting, Final August 5, 2015 • Gorst Subarea Plan, City of Bremerton and Kitsap County, December 2013 In addition, the City has analyzed UGAs in the following Capital Facility Plans: • Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, City of Bremerton, Adopted March 19, 2014 • 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, City of Bremerton and HDR, Final December 2014 • Water System Plan Update 2012, City of Bremerton Department of Public Works & Utilities and KPFF, June 2013 °" �� 1'u!'''u uu!I uu!I jj� 11 E I ilkIL 4.1 Fire cServices Overview The City of Bremerton Fire Department is responsible for providing emergency and non -emergency fire, rescue, and medical services. The Department's mission is "to heighten the quality of life for citizens of Bremerton in a safe and efficient manner by the prevention of fires, the mitigation of natural and man- made hazards, and providing assistance to citizens in need of emergency services" (Fire Department, 2015). Inventory The capital facilities used by the Fire Department include three station buildings, emergency medical services (EMS) vehicles, and Fire Engines, which are operated by 56 employees. Exhibit 43 summarizes the capital facilities for the Bremerton Fire Department, which includes fire stations located in west, central and east Bremerton. These facilities and the facilities of other Districts are also shown on Exhibit 44. Three of the six fire engines are reserve units, which are on stand-by to replace the three active units. These three engines are not staffed. Exhibit 43. Current Facilities Inventory — Bremerton Fire Department Source: City of Bremerton Comprehensive plan City Service Appendix, 2010; BERK, 2013. Fire Station No. 1 911 Park Avenue 1 Command Yes 15,346 2 Engines 2 Medic Units Max Meigs Fire Station No. 2 5005 Kitsap Way 2 Engines Yes 9,389 2 Medic Units Ted Tillet Fire Station No. 3 3027 Olympus Drive 2 Engines Yes 7,640 1 Medic Units Drill Tower* 1201 Union Avenue No 1,500 Total 1 Command... 33,875 .... 6 Engines 5 Medic Units 1 Ladder Truck * Drill tower owned jointly in partnership with Central Kitsap Fire & Rescue, Kitsap County Fire District #7, Olympic College and the National Guard; Chief Al Duke, 2015. Source: City of Bremerton Comprehensive plan City Service Appendix, 2010; BERK, 2013. The Bremerton Fire Department, throughout its three stations, is staffed by a total of 56 employees, with a minimum daily staffing of 13 personnel. The staff includes the following: • 1 Fire Chief • 4 Battalion Chiefs • 1 Fire Marshal/Captain • 1 Medical Officer/Captain • 1 Fire Prevention Specialist • 3 Firefighters/Mechanics • 3 Firefighters/SCBA Repair • 15 Firefighters • 9 Lieutenants • 1 OA Senior Specialist • 14 Paramedics • 5 Staff • 3 Station Captains Exhibit 44. Bremerton Fire Department — Fire Stations Z o as L M11= Ekurse. Kiitap C" untuZID14 Fehr dF�r 011 5. 0 caty'rbs Port 47johaud Gdyof Port 'Orchard V a IIII I� 0 0 Fire Station - Bremerton Fire Departmrent10 lie' , C Fire Station -[ether Districts 0 City Limits I—_ I UGABaLIndary Pa rlks d Military Bremerton East UGA Brernertan'West. UGA Bremerton Gorst, UGA Source: City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, Fehr & Peers, and BERK Consulting 2015. FFHR �PFFRS 1'11111, 1111 1131EIR K, Level er°vice Determination Fire facility needs are a function of facility location and staffing, which feeds into a unit's response time in the case of an emergency. As such, level of service (LOS) is generally measured according to response time. Response time is defined as the amount of time that elapses between the initial call for assistance and arrival of the first emergency unit. Response time is planned for through geographic distribution of stations, type of equipment based at each facility, and the staffing level at each facility. Bremerton's Fire Department has a current adopted LOS of 6.0 minutes response time. Given that over the 2003-2013 period, there was an average of 0.19 calls per capita annually, the City can expect to have an increase in calls of around 38% between 2015 and 2036. This increase will have an impact on the Department's capacity to meet their adopted response times, increasing the need for emergency services by 2036. Projects Exhibit 45 contains a list of capacity and non -capacity projects planned over the next 20 years. Immediate costs for City services are shown for the years 2016-2021. Longer-term capital needs would be associated with annexation of UGAs, described below. Although there are no projects specifically assigned to years 2022 — 2036 at this time, it does not mean that capital spending will not occur in those years. Exhibit 45. Fire Department Planned Projects (in thousands) Source: (Duke, Chief, Bremerton Fire Department, 2015); (Farley, 2015). Cost and Revenue Exhibit 46 and Exhibit 47 contain the cost and funding sources for capital investments over the next six years and through 2036. Exhibit 46. Fire Deoartment Planned Proiect Costs (in thousand Exhibit 47. Fire Department Planned Proiect Revenues (in thousan November 2015 Levy 4,495 0 4,495 Total 4,495 .... 0 4,495 Source: (Duke, Chief, Bremerton Fire Department, 2015); (Farley, 2015) UGA Analysis On average, the Fire Department received 0.19 calls per capita annually between 2003 and 2013, including both fire and EMS calls (Fire Department, 2015). Assuming that this rate continues, the UGA areas will add around 2,600 calls by 2036. These added calls will impact the Department's ability to respond quickly and it is likely that investments will be needed in order to run the service at the desired response time of 6.0 minutes. East Bremerton is currently served by Central Kitsap Fire & Rescue (CKFR); the District has stations in proximity to the UGA (see Exhibit 43, and the Bremerton Fire Department also has a station in the Sylvan area. The City anticipates based on the 2015 UGA boundaries the City could serve East Bremerton even with the additional population allocation over 20 years. (Duke, Chief, Bremerton Fire Department, 2015) For the West Bremerton UGA areas, there are fire stations well -situated to respond to these areas. If annexed, the City would take over provision of fire and EMS services for West Hills (currently served by CKFR), Rocky Point (currently served by South Kitsap Fire and Rescue [SKFR]), and Navy Yard City (currently served by SKFR); no additional capital needs are anticipated though there would be a need to add staffing due to the calls for service for Navy Yard City. The Fire Department estimates that annexing Navy Yard City would necessitate changes to the current response zones including the need for two additional firefighters. (BERK Consulting, 2015) Just outside of the Gorst UGA there is a SKFR District station, which has the ability to provide rapid response times. The station has one engine, one medic unit and one brush truck for fighting wildland fires (AECOM and BERK, 2013). The short term impacts of annexing Gorst UGA are to be addressed through a contract with SKFR. However in the long term, the City would need to look at providing these services directly. In that case, the City would need a fire station (of which there is one currently in Gorst), an engine/paramedic unit, and 6-12 FTE's to provide fire service. (BERK Consulting, 2015) Overview The City of Bremerton's Police Department occupies three facilities in three different locations. Administrative functions are in City Hall, the Patrol Division is in the West Precinct, and the Special Operations Group is located in another facility. There are 72 personnel employed by the Bremerton Police Department and five volunteers. Jail services are currently contracted out to Kitsap County, which consists of a jail, a work release facility, and a juvenile facility and are located on the courthouse campus in Port Orchard. Inventory The capital facilities in Bremerton include buildings and vehicles for patrol officers and administrative staff. Exhibit 48 summarizes the capital facilities for the Bremerton Police Department. Location of the stations are shown on Exhibit 49. Exhibit 48. Current Facilities Inventory — Bremerton Police Department Source: City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan City Service Appendix, 2004; BERK, 2013; City of Bremerton, 2015. The police department has the following personnel on staff: • 13 civilian personnel • 1 Chief • 2 Captains • 2 Lieutenants • 8 Sergeants • 45 Officers • 1 School Resource Officer There are also five volunteer chaplains working with the Bremerton Police Department. (Staffing Levels, 2015) New Officers Exhibit 49. Bremerton Police Department — Police Stations Source: City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, Fehr & Peers, and BERK Consulting 2015. Level er°vice Determination LOS standards for law enforcement facilities are based on the ratio of officers to population, and the ratio square feet of building space to population. The ratio for LOS is partially dependent on crime rates, which can be impacted by location, socio-economic characteristics, demographics, size of a city and other local dynamics. The current LOS standards for the police department is 1.8 officers per 1,000 residents and 250 square feet per officer and the local staffing level is consistent with state averages. (City of Bremerton, 2004) Exhibit 50. LOS Analysis — Bremerton Police Department * Officer count assumes reaching LOS of 1.8 officers per 1,000. Source: Gorst Planned Action, 2013; BERK, 2015; City of Bremerton, 2015. Using the LOS of 1.8 officers per 1,000 population, the department currently has a deficit of 14 officers and would have a deficit of 39 officers by 2036. Using the facilities level of service of 250 square feet per officer, the Bremerton Police Department currently has surplus capacity of 1,935 square feet of facilities. However, assuming Bremerton were meeting LOS of 1.8 officers per 1,000 population in the future, Bremerton currently needs an additional 800 square feet of law enforcement facilities and will need an additional 7,800 square feet by 2036. This would require an almost 50 percent increase in space over the current 16,185 square feet of law enforcement facilities. Projects Exhibit 51 contains a list of capacity and non -capacity projects planned over the next 20 years. Exhibit 51. Police Facilities Planned Proiects (in thousand The current CIP includes $90,000 for the year 2015 that would likely be moved forward to 2016: $40,000 is proposed for body cameras which would be implemented when the City completes a public records ordinance, and $50,000 for a fleet car. A new fleet car is anticipated annually between 2015 and 2020 as these vehicles are replaced after 125,000 miles. A raid van would also be needed within one years' budget. Other expenditures are not anticipated unless annexation occurs (see below). For the purposes of this CFP, $50,000 per year for the period 2021-2036 is assumed based on the annual fleet replacement costs. Cost eve e Exhibit 52 and Exhibit 53 contain the cost and funding sources for capital investments over the next six years and through 2036. Exhibit 52. Police Department Planned Proiects Cost (in thousand Exhibit 53. Police Department Planned Projects Revenue (in thousands) General Government Capital 390 700 1,090 Improvement Fund (REET) Total 390 Source: BERK 2015 (2016 - 2021 Capital Improvement Plan, 2015) 700 1,090 UGA ►lysis Using the LOS of 1.8 officers per 1,000 residents, the UGA population alone would require around 23 officers by 2036. At the current LOS, the number of officers needed to meet the standard of 1.8 officers per 1,000 is currently unmet and Bremerton would continue to see a deficiency through 2036. Given that annexation would result in around 13,200 new residents under the protection of the Bremerton law enforcement officials, Bremerton would need to make investments in the facilities as well as hire more officers on staff in order to meet LOS standards by 2036. Existing police stations are centrally located towards the downtown area of the City of Bremerton. East Bremerton is currently served by the Kitsap County Sheriff. The County has several stations in central and south Kitsap County though not in the study area: • Central Office: 3951 Randall Way, Silverdale, WA • Kitsap Mall Office: 10315 Silverdale Way NW, Silverdale, WA • Main Office 614 Division Street, Port Orchard, WA Based on the 2015 UGA boundaries, the City anticipates being able to serve East Bremerton even with the additional population allocation over the next 20 years. (Burchett, 2015) If the West Bremerton and Gorst UGAs were to be annexed, no capital facilities would be needed in the short term or long term according to the City's recent annexation study. However, there would be a need to add officers and alter patrol zones to ensure response time objectives are met. While Rocky Point, West Hills, and Gorst do not currently generate a large call volume, Navy Yard City is known for a high volume of service calls related to felony crimes. If a new patrol area were added, it would require 6.0 FTEs to provide full-day patrol service. There would also be a need for 0.5 FTE Community Resource Specialists. (BERK Consulting, 2015) Overview Bremerton provides a system of parks and open space areas which are managed by the City's Parks and Recreation Department, along with the help of the Bremerton Parks and Recreation Commission. The service area for the parks system includes all land within Bremerton's city limits but the City's plans consider the City's assigned UGAs and Central Kitsap. This Parks analysis is consistent with the 2014 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. Rotary Park, 2015 Inventory Bremerton has 331 acres of parks and recreation facilities and ten miles of trails. Exhibit 54 provides a list of parks facilities in the City of Bremerton. Local parks are divided into a variety of categories: Regional, Neighborhood, Community, Pocket, Natural, Plazas, and Streetscapes & Greenways, each with a different purpose and specifications. Only Neighborhood and Community Parks are assigned levels of service. Exhibit 54. Current Facilities Inventory Source: Bremerton Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, 2014 Additional information about parks and recreation in Bremerton, including more specific information about park properties, is available in the 2014 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. Level er°vice Determination The Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department updated level of service standards in the 2014 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS). See Exhibit 55. NRPA Guideline Bremerton LOS Standard Exhibit 55. Bremerton and NRPA LOS 5 —10 acres 1.5 — 10 acres 0.25 -.5 mile 0.5 mile son 30 — 50 acres 10 — 50 acres 0.5 — 3 miles 2-5 miles Source: Bremerton Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, 2014; National Recreation and Parks Association, 1995. Based on the neighborhood and community park LOS standards for park service areas, the City of Bremerton has not completely met its service goals and there are gaps in the system. See Exhibit 56 and Exhibit 57. Parks and Lands Acres Regional Parks: Pendergast Park (also considered a 1199 Union Avenue 50.3 neighborhood park for those within a 1/3 mile walking distance) Community Parks Exhibit 56 78.1 Neighborhood Parks Exhibit 57 44.8 Pocket Parks Exhibit 58 6.08 Natural Areas Exhibit 59 111.4 Plazas Exhibit 60 5.7 Streetscapes & Greenways Exhibit 61 9.5 Ivy Green Cemetery 1401 Naval Avenue 14.9 Total Acres 276.0 Other Facilities: Square Feet Bremerton Senior Center 1140 Nipsic Avenue 5,000 Glenn Jarstad Aquatic Center 50 Magnuson Way 21,000 Sheridan Community Recreation Center 680 Lebo Boulevard 30,000 Gold Mountain Golf Complex 7263 W. Belfair Valley Rd 180 Acres Total Square Feet 56,000 SF/180 Acres Source: Bremerton Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, 2014 Additional information about parks and recreation in Bremerton, including more specific information about park properties, is available in the 2014 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. Level er°vice Determination The Bremerton Parks and Recreation Department updated level of service standards in the 2014 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS). See Exhibit 55. NRPA Guideline Bremerton LOS Standard Exhibit 55. Bremerton and NRPA LOS 5 —10 acres 1.5 — 10 acres 0.25 -.5 mile 0.5 mile son 30 — 50 acres 10 — 50 acres 0.5 — 3 miles 2-5 miles Source: Bremerton Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan, 2014; National Recreation and Parks Association, 1995. Based on the neighborhood and community park LOS standards for park service areas, the City of Bremerton has not completely met its service goals and there are gaps in the system. See Exhibit 56 and Exhibit 57. Exhibit 56. Bremerton Parks & Recreation - Community Parks 2-5 Mile Service Area Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) Exhibit 57. Bremerton Parks and Recreation - Neighborhood Parks % Mile Service Area V/A y16i�" C y Parks Aw to lo z fVIl P.Murk E O///O� c firg�r- Rof-y P©r Paresf Ridgii Pdrk ���"ryl ifA �y �2 fll H.ddam Party lls fiiVyfi ltl_...,__.. NCvtsap Esyke I ,.,. If Ko—i, Park I.. Y, LL ?t �'. I0t Iliams Park ,L 11, I �..� „ i l�ria� rurAu �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�� mane e PlayAileAd d�u uruP��;�' " L"u maban Park iq V*Owv IrNaV A.IPiirer iu b -�µ =' 11 �o nvrrt¢'s,A,K 9PrP A"_ s Bd2Dr'r qty# A..D Park F' ""'" ✓i,X.kdr 'iWa Permmkle Pack QFo,r e) W.—. Aue Pllayfield ....:....t:'� t_.Centrrvll IK.ts.p UGA i ci�y Loan Ls, UGA 1, wOrif � Y a fr j u rrry �orgriP kouLrWlPrrr�+P fliopyood a tuV�lee �� Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) 11 All�C roar ryP.ks ._n'r'+�wrvuo�wttnwn ��d�� shy t pro -e Po ru y Rark 5-i- Aran. t2 n R was F.,k Sn v - A— [2 rn� tv A d. P k S a Ax A2 n. R. C R m y %,k 5.M— Are.er [5 msAlk ,,. L P k 3 Aap P nr o. r w A D_ P.rk garA<.Arem ps nni p City L" nils i UGA r C'.wr*.1 KiMp UGA U / / f o I. •• AWA WO Q% - r +p ff { h r 1 LVtJyL� 4 � p W,Evergreen bn p V y 1Fi f� d, �� TI Pn^41r"y^ Par yffi w, f. rfir' 1 ^•lir iM^ i ' I I/2 9 _ r t"", N rmp-oa^,F �/ 25 01 n/Iw� M�Nm$ Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) Exhibit 57. Bremerton Parks and Recreation - Neighborhood Parks % Mile Service Area V/A y16i�" C y Parks Aw to lo z fVIl P.Murk E O///O� c firg�r- Rof-y P©r Paresf Ridgii Pdrk ���"ryl ifA �y �2 fll H.ddam Party lls fiiVyfi ltl_...,__.. NCvtsap Esyke I ,.,. If Ko—i, Park I.. Y, LL ?t �'. I0t Iliams Park ,L 11, I �..� „ i l�ria� rurAu �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�� mane e PlayAileAd d�u uruP��;�' " L"u maban Park iq V*Owv IrNaV A.IPiirer iu b -�µ =' 11 �o nvrrt¢'s,A,K 9PrP A"_ s Bd2Dr'r qty# A..D Park F' ""'" ✓i,X.kdr 'iWa Permmkle Pack QFo,r e) W.—. Aue Pllayfield ....:....t:'� t_.Centrrvll IK.ts.p UGA i ci�y Loan Ls, UGA 1, wOrif � Y a fr j u rrry �orgriP kouLrWlPrrr�+P fliopyood a tuV�lee �� Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) Exhibit 58. Pocket Parks Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) Exhibit 59. Natural Areas P �. M hJulurall Areas O , Il City Ii Ub7u ar^ L JGA 'V ppb C -r-.1 K,rsap UGA „, . w p 'Stephenson onyon � Y h , W,p,.D fl q h4grineV"` Past Farb NgtureArea p� u. d� Kitsa Lake 1,5 G u e_ L�o r Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) �ww„ i0000000000�� �a�ket ��_ Bazaar • . �.__.._.�—,�.,�._ Q wl City Limits UGA. rp Central Kh.p UGA r ww w r. „e v. B1 r iY i/ y Pat C d rey nr Vista„ Ya n „, , J N Lent Landing n x K t 1 ri James Park >m @ r Waller ParkIfAi t �. -Lower Roto y Vista Park �, „ on Park k Smith Notural NI Play Po Y G r � L w air ���� ;Bachmanrn 00 �"`" 4th Street P, Pork Mini Park 0.7s> MI Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) Exhibit 59. Natural Areas P �. M hJulurall Areas O , Il City Ii Ub7u ar^ L JGA 'V ppb C -r-.1 K,rsap UGA „, . w p 'Stephenson onyon � Y h , W,p,.D fl q h4grineV"` Past Farb NgtureArea p� u. d� Kitsa Lake 1,5 G u e_ L�o r Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) No plw t Exhibit 60. Plazas nit, V /0sap Conference Center Plaza Memorial Plaza I st 51.' Plroaza Harborside Fountain Park Whitey I7 hMI )omstod Plaza r Itr, St Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) Exhibit 61. Streetscapes and Greenways F, RM 3 41(l Bremerton's Central Business District j4th St., Burwell St., or f N Pacific Ave-, " Washington Ave.) 4 lei ................ pf" mil - Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) Projects Exhibit 62 contains a list of capacity and non -capacity projects planned over the next 20 years. Exhibit 62. Parks Planned Projects (in thousands) CAPACITY PROJECTS (Projects Required to Meet LOS) Manette Playfield _ Develop master 50% Grant, plan and enact recommendations to High 40% FEET, 500 500 bring up to standard 10% Donation Warren Avenue Playfield - Acquisition for neighborhood park expansion to 60% Levy, bring up to standard. Develop master High 20% FEET, 1,575 1,575 plan and enact recommendations. 20% Grant Wheaton / Riddell (1.5-3 acres) - Acquisition for future neighborhood High 50% Grant, - 130 130 park site 50% FEET Haddon Park - Upgrade park with 50% Grant, amenities to bring up to standard High 40% FEET, 300 - 300 10% Donation Off- Leash Dog Park. develop 50% Grant, permanent off -leash park on existing Medium 40% FEET, 200 200 land 10% Donation NAD Park Develop master plan and 50% Grant, enact recommendations to bring up to Medium 40% FEET, 475 475 standard 10% Donation Forest Ridge Park - Develop master plan and enact recommendations to Medium 50% Grant, 400 400 bring up to standard 50% FEET Pendergast Regional Park - Upgrade to Donation via bring up to standard Medium lease with 1,390 1,390 non-profit Lions Park - Upgrade boat launch, 75% Grant, dock, parking to bring up to standard Medium 25% FEET 1,135 - 1,135 Evergreen Rotary Park - Upgrade with amenities (Complete perimeter 50% Grant, pathway; Enhance beach Medium 25% FEET, - 1,170 1,170 access/habitat; Replace shelter; 25% Donation Improve Farmer's Market facilities.) P -Patch Garden - Develop community 50% Grant, garden Medium - 50% Donation - 200 200 Kitsap Lake Park - Upgrade with amenities (boat launch, shelter, Medium 50% Grant, 300 300 signage) to bring up to standard 50% FEET Matan Park Expansion - Acquisition for neighborhood park expansion to bring Medium 50% Grant, 60 60 up to standard 50% FEET e o e ° o Perry / Sylvan (1.5-3 acres) - Acquisition for future neighborhood Medium 50% Grant, 130 130 park site 50% FEET Acquisition. for future neighborhood park site near Wheaton / Sheridan Could be replaced by no- cost lease of Medium 190 190 School District property across Sheridan. NON -CAPACITY PROJECTS (Other Projects Needed for Maintenance and Operations) Harborside Park - Line fountain basins High FEET 125 125 Memorial Plaza Fountain - Repair and line concrete waterways High FEET 75 - - 75 Playground Replacement - 14 parks 50% FEET, High 50% General 100 100 300 500 Fund Jarstad Park to Kitsap Lake Trail .... .... .... ...o .... .... .... .... .... .... High 50% Grant, _ - TBD - 50% Donation Park and Trail Signage System - Develop and install standardized High 50% Grant, 175 175 entry, wayfinding and historical signs 50% Donation Kitsap Lake Park - Upgrade with amenities (boat launch, shelter, 50% Grant, signage) to bring up to standard Medium 50% FEET 300 300 Bataan Park - Upgrade with ADA 50% Grant, Access and amenities to bring up to Medium 40% FEET, - 125 125 standard 10% Donation Irrigation Upgrades- Upgrade or install automatic irrigation systems Medium FEET 550 - 550 Forested Areas- Develop forest management plan for heavily wooded Medium Grant 20 20 parks Maintenance Facility- Develop permanent maintenance facility Medium FEET 700 700 Water Trail Amenities- Develop non- 50% Grant motorized water craft amenities Medium 50% 10 10 Donation Sheridan Park Community Center — Renovate building to meet codes: 50% Levy, ADA, HVAC, Restrooms, Windows, Medium 50% FEET 2,500 2,500 Parking Lot Senior Center - Improve or Replace (ADA access, main entrance, parking Medium 50% Levy, 5,500 5,500 lot) 50% FEET Cost eve e Exhibit 63 and Exhibit 64 contain the cost and funding sources for capital investments over the next four years and through 2036. Exhibit 63. Parks Planned Projects Cost (in thousands) Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014); City of Bremerton, BERK 2015 e o e ° o Lower Roto Vista Park - Improve park access with signage and new stairs Medium 50% Grant, 30 30 50% Donation Pat Carey Vista - Pave parking area; Enhance shoreline Medium 50% Grant, 125 125 50% REET Bachmann Park - Enhance landscaping; Repave plaza; Install water fountain Low REET 120 120 Gateway - Replace landscaped median with low -maintenance alternative Low REET 140 140 Evergreen Rotary Park - Overlay parking lot Low 50% Grant, 150 150 50% REET Sheridan Park - Upgrade waterfront 50% Grant, pocket park Low 50% REET 200 200 Kitsap Lake Wetlands - Develop Master Plan Low General Fund 20 20 9th Street Mini Park - Upgrade pocket park with shoreline naturalization and landscaping Low REET 60 60 Ivy Green Cemetery Replace perimeter fence and entry sign; Install Low REET 350 350 permanent restroom Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014); (Berna, 2015) Cost eve e Exhibit 63 and Exhibit 64 contain the cost and funding sources for capital investments over the next four years and through 2036. Exhibit 63. Parks Planned Projects Cost (in thousands) Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014); City of Bremerton, BERK 2015 Source: (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014); City of Bremerton, BERK 2015 UGA ►lysis On the whole a population of nearly 13,500 persons in the UGA would mean a total need for 11.5 acres of neighborhood parks and 20 acres of community parks. Within the city limits near the East Bremerton UGA, Recreational facilities like the Sheridan Park Community Center, Senior Center, and Glenn Jarstad Aquatic Center are concentrated. (Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan, 2014) With additional population growth there would be a need to add facilities based on the City's LOS standard. In West Bremerton and Gorst UGAs, additional park acres would be needed to meet City standards if annexed. To meet LOS standards established by the City, a neighborhood class level park is required to be within % mile pedestrian distance of all residences. The LOS park analysis excludes the Navy Yard City and Harborside Fountain Park in Bremerton. Pendergast Regional Park serves as a neighborhood park for those residents living within a half mile walking distance and is included in the LOS analysis as a neighborhood park (Berna, 2015). Using a LOS minimum standard of 1.5 acres per new neighborhood park, based on the land area included in the UGAs and the locations of existing neighborhood and community parks, the analysis estimates that there would need to be an additional seven neighborhood parks. This would translate into a minimum of 10.5 acres of new park lands that would need to be purchased in the annexed areas. The estimated cost of purchasing new park lands depends on a variety of factors such as location, site topography, potential remediation needs, and other factors. (BERK Consulting, 2015) Overview Public buildings in the City of Bremerton are facilities that are necessary ensure that day-to-day responsibilities of the government have a place to conduct business (such as City Hall) or that provide some other sort of service to the community (such as libraries). City building facilities should provide convenience and access to those using the facilities, and they should be planned, constructed, maintained, and operated with consideration of public financial resources. Inventory Exhibit 65 lists the inventory of public building facilities in the City of Bremerton. Exhibit 65. Facilities Inventory — Public Buildings Source: City of Bremerton, 2015 Level er°vice Determination Exhibit 66 shows illustrates an LOS standard that would maintain capacity through 2036 with the current inventory. The analysis calculates an administrative LOS including the City Hall, Public Works Complex, Park Headquarters, and Municipal Court. Remaining facilities are cultural or recreational rather than administrative and should be planned based on user and City needs. The library is part of the Kitsap Regional Library System. Exhibit 66. LOS Anal *Current Square Feet includes City Hall, the Public Works Complex, the Park Headquarters, and the Municipal Court. Source: BERK, 2015. The City should have an LOS for facilities deemed necessary for development. In the past the City has not identified a specific LOS standard for public buildings as it is not directly tied to development; though it may be affected by addition of population such as through UGA expansions. The City may optionally provide a LOS measure. Norm Dicks Government Center 345 6th Street 15,138 Public Safety Buildings — Police 1025 Burwell Street Bldg. A... 21,727 7 Department Municipal Court 550 Park Avenue 9,816 Library 612 Fifth Street 8,158 Community Theater 599 Lebo Boulevard 14,800 Admiral Theatre 507 Pacific Avenue 25,000 Golf Course Clubhouse 7263 W Belfair Valley Road 16,346 Sheridan Park Community Center 680 Lebo Boulevard 30,000 Puget Sound Naval Museum & Fountain 251 First Street 9,000 Room Glen Jarstad Aquatic Center 2270 Schley Boulevard 21,000 Senior Citizens Center 1140 Nipsic 5,000 Public Works Complex 100 Oyster Bay 32,300 Pendergast Regional Park 1199 Union Avenue 2,500 Restroom/Concession Building Golf Course Concession Building 7263 W Belfair Valley Road 460 Conference Center 100 Washington Avenue 22,100 Total Public Buildings 233,345 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015 Level er°vice Determination Exhibit 66 shows illustrates an LOS standard that would maintain capacity through 2036 with the current inventory. The analysis calculates an administrative LOS including the City Hall, Public Works Complex, Park Headquarters, and Municipal Court. Remaining facilities are cultural or recreational rather than administrative and should be planned based on user and City needs. The library is part of the Kitsap Regional Library System. Exhibit 66. LOS Anal *Current Square Feet includes City Hall, the Public Works Complex, the Park Headquarters, and the Municipal Court. Source: BERK, 2015. The City should have an LOS for facilities deemed necessary for development. In the past the City has not identified a specific LOS standard for public buildings as it is not directly tied to development; though it may be affected by addition of population such as through UGA expansions. The City may optionally provide a LOS measure. The current effective level of service for administrative buildings is around 2,200 square feet per 1,000 residents. Adjusting the LOS for public buildings to around 1,600 square feet per 1,000 residents, there would be capacity to continue meeting the LOS standard in public buildings beyond 2036. Projects According to city staff, there are currently no public building projects planned beyond 2018. All projects are Category II, and include security, renovation, and preventative maintenance projects. Exhibit 67 shows planned projects for public buildings in Bremerton. Although there are no public building projects currently planned in years 2022 through 2036, the City should expect capital investments to occur during this time. Exhibit 67. Public Buildings Planned Projects (in thousand Category I (Capacity Projects General Required to Meet LOS) Capital/REET Category II (Other Projects Needed General for Maintenance and Operations) Capital/REET 247 - 247 Total 247 247 Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. 4.5 Transportation See Transportation Appendix under separate cover. a Overview Wastewater services are provided by the Bremerton Department of Public Works and Utilities. The service area covers 13 drainage basins, with four extending beyond the city limits into unincorporated county areas. The 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan analyzes the system for its current and future capacity and improvement needs. The 2014 Plan is an update to the 2005 plan and is on a 20 -year planning horizon through year 2033.2 The Plan fulfills state requirements in WAC 173-240-020. The wastewater system is in charge of sewage collection, transmission, treatment, and bio -solids reuse. The wastewater service area served by the utility is the City of Bremerton, as well as the unincorporated areas of West Bremerton, East Bremerton and other bordering areas. The utility also serves the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and other U.S. Navy facilities. (2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, 2014) 2 It should be noted the plan uses population estimates consistent with City plans in the city limits and similar to County plans in the UGAs; it should be noted that countywide population estimates were extended from 2025 to 2036 without increase and thus the 2033 time horizon is considered compatible with the Comprehensive Plan Update horizon of 2036. (See Executive Summary 1-2 and East Bremerton and West Hills appendix, page 8 in the (2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, 2014)) The Clean Water Act is the federally regulating act for wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal. The Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to implement pollution control and to delegate enforcement to the states when states enforce regulations that are equally or more restrictive than the federal regulations. As such, in Washington State, Department of Ecology administers and enforces the Clean Water Act. Specifics about the State's regulations are detailed in the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, which complies with general sewer plan requirements laid out by Washington State Law (WAC 173-240-050). Since a 1992 lawsuit between Puget Soundkeeper and Bremerton related to implementation of measures regulated by the Federal Clean Water Act, Bremerton has responded by implementing those measures that were ordered by Ecology as a result of the suit. More information can be found in the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan. The wastewater treatment plant in Bremerton has been in compliance with discharge standards since 2005 and has continually received annual Outstanding Performance Awards from Ecology. A new permit issued in 2013 requires Bremerton to plan for expansion when the flow reaches 85 percent of the capacity for three consecutive months. The 2014 plan anticipates that the permit capacity could potentially reach year 2033, assuming population growth occurs as projected. See the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan for more information about wastewater capacity planning through 2033, which fits closely with this plan's 2036 planning period and growth numbers. (2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, 2014) The sewer service area is the City of Bremerton's city limits, assigned UGAs, and two areas near Kitsap Lake near the West Bremerton UGA. The City also accepts flows from the U.S. Navy Puget Sound Naval Shipyard as well as Kitsap County Sewer District No. 1 through contracted service agreements. As identified in the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, the area served by sewer is around 29 percent watershed or utility land, 29 percent single family residential, 24 percent industrial, and 7 percent mixed use with small areas of other land classifications. (2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, 2014) Inventory The existing wastewater treatment plant has a permit limit of 15.5 MGD. The Wastewater Comprehensive Plan 2014 describes flow loads and flow projections (see Level of Service below). Bremerton's sewer collection system takes flows from conventional sanitary sewage, stormwater inflow and groundwater infiltration. Exhibit 68 lists the specific facilities providing wastewater services in Bremerton. Exhibit 68. Facility Inventory — Wastewater Treatment Facilities Bremerton Wastewater Treatment Plant 1600 Oyster Bay Ave W 15.5 mgd permit limit Forest Enhancement Sites One & Two Near Gold Mtn. Golf Course 300 acres Source: Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014; City Services Appendix, 2012. The components of the wastewater system can be found in Exhibit 69. chibit 69. Facility Inventory— Wastewater System Componen ® ® e® ®eIMEMMMEMEEMM Sewer Basins 22 Pipeline Miles 176 Pump Stations 39 Odor Control Stations 7 CSO Outfalls. 15 Westside Wastewater Treatment Plant 1 Eastside CSO Treatment Plant 1 Design Flow (mgd) 10.1 Average Annual Flow (mgd) 4.7 Source: Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014 A,_ 01 Ni ZTA q 11 atl p a .g �k "� i �' ✓ �II Ory .,"' py I ( ,r p Ir _ kw Ill w hd T-77 e , 4; r � y pt. yy le ZI !� IL 71 � � .., �, ✓ .rte l � � � � � f rf � hx � � N l l r � .,✓ Iwl x, ffIrr yrc 1�"m. wr-. rw . �i ��, i ✓, l � � maw,;,, � � �' Alf ...... ......... .... .... ................1 "...... ......... ......... .................. ........................ . OOR _ onm ~ LL Sp .89 ii a' ,1�, r „" "N",rryry��� yj i f � J ,Mt i a. =M ari w,, a A y� l N 1 e n ....... ...... '............. ........: ......................... ............. ............ . Level er°vice Determination The service standard for capacity of the existing sewer facilities to serve Bremerton's current and future needs is based on the number of gallons of effluent generated per capita per day. Using the county -wide LOS of 100 gallons per capita per day, Exhibit 72 shows the LOS analysis for wastewater facilities through 2036 for the combined city and UGA population. Note: Population numbers include the City of Bremerton and the Bremerton UGA. Projected population for the Kitsap County Sewer District No. 1 and the Naval Shipyard are not included since they are served by a contract that could be renegotiated. Source: City Services Appendix, 2004; Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014. The 2014 Wastewater System Plan uses a slightly lower per capita standard of 71 gallons per person per day (gpcpd) and 35 gallons per employee per day (gpepd). The results would be similar to but lower than the 100 gallons per capita, the current City Services Element standard. Source: Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014. The 2014 Wastewater System Plan illustrates that the City has capacity to serve current and expected population and growth through 2033. The 2014 Wastewater System Plan estimates encompass, and are greater than, the CFP 2036 population estimates of 53,407 in the City Limits and 13,473 in the assigned UGAs. Thus, the functional plan would more than accommodate the expected growth. Source: (2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, 2014) Projects The wastewater collection system currently has sufficient capacity for wastewater flows but there is potential for future development, growth, or sewer service extension to put pressure on the system's capacity. Bremerton has identified nine new service areas that may impact the existing system, which includes annexations currently sewered by Kitsap County, extensions to unsewered areas, and future developments. (2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, 2014) There are anticipated capital expenses and operating and maintenance expenses. These anticipated projects are funded mainly by rate revenues, permits, interest, and grants. Capital investments by type of project include: • Collection System. Replacement, repair, and improvement of pipelines, mains, and outfalls. The majority of funds will be spent on planning and construction and the work being done will correct system deficiencies. • New Service Areas. Construction of sewer collection and extension facilities with all funds spent on planning and construction. Work being done will be new infrastructure to support comprehensive plan UGA growth. • Facilities and Equipment. Replacement of pump stations and upgrades to pump stations and odor control system, as well as installation of emergency generators. Fund will be spent mostly on equipment. Work being done will correct system deficiencies and repair existing infrastructure to support current development patterns. • Wastewater Treatment Plant. Replacement and rehabilitation of wastewater treatment plant system. The majority of funds spend will be on equipment and the work being done will repair existing infrastructure to support current development patterns. Operations and Maintenance. Replacement and cleaning to maintain and improve program. Funds will be spent on equipment, planning, and construction to repair existing infrastructure and correct system deficiencies. Exhibit 75 contains categories of capacity and non -capacity projects planned between 2016 and 2021, as well as beyond 2021 per the 2014 plan. The project list includes projects in the Urban Growth Area under see "New Service Area" section of the table. Details of the projects are found in the 2014 plan. Exhibit 75. Categories of Wastewater Planned Projects, Note: Assumptions based on the 2013 rate study. 6 -Year project costs are based on the annual Capital Improvements Program. 20 -year costs are based on the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update. The lists were consolidated to provide the most up-to-date analysis of wastewater projects over the next 20 -years. * UFA = User fee assessment; G = Grants & ULID. Source: Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014; City of Bremerton, 2016; BERK, 2016. A map of the proposed wastewater capital projects is provided in Exhibit 76. Revenues for sewer capital spending come from rate revenues paid by sewer account customers, general facility charges, grants, developer contributions, interest income, operating transfers (rate funded system reinvestment), and other miscellaneous sources. In 2015, the total revenue available was $13.6 million. The 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update assumed that Bremerton will issue $3.5 million in 2015, $5.0 million in 2016, $9.0 million in 2016, and $8.0 million of debt in 2019. A recent 2013 rate study proposed annual rate increases of 3.5 percent through 2016 and 3.0 percent through 2019. However, due to the increased level of capital improvement expenditures and long-term debt, the results of the analysis in the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update showed the need for annual rate adjustments of 4.0 percent in 2017- 2020. Given changes to the project list or other assumptions (e.g. growth increase, slow down, or not occur), the level of rate adjustment required may be affected. Exhibit 77 and Exhibit 78 contain the cost and funding sources for capital investments through 2036 adjusting costs for inflation. The 2014 plan is operationalized by the City's annual Capital Improvements Program that provides more detail on the six-year list as the functional sewer plan is implemented. Exhibit 77. Wastewater Planned Projects Costs, YOE$ (in thousands) NEW.f f f 0 Emilio f Category I (Capacity Projects Required 10,191 43,276 212,711 266,178 to Meet LOS) Category II (Other Projects Needed for 19,143 18,414 31,234 68,791 Maintenance and Operations) TOTAL 29,334 61,690 243,945 334,969 Note: 6 -year project costs based on the annual Capital Improvements Program. 20 -year costs based on the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update. The lists were consolidated to provide the most up-to-date analysis of wastewater projects over the next 20 -years. Source: Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014; City of Bremerton, 2016; BERK, 2016. Exhibit 78 contains the funding sources for capital investments through 2020, which is the six-year planning period for the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan. The 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan provides a more detailed summary of funding for years one through six (ending in 2020). Exhibit 78. Wastewater Planned Proiects Revenues th Capital Fund Reserves 1,622 General Facility Charges 1,509 Grant Funding/Developer Contributions 12,196 Assumed New Revenue Bonds 17,500 Subtotal Funding Sources 32,827 Capital Funded by Rates 2,600 Total Funding Sources Through 2020 35,427 Note: Assumptions based on the 2013 rate study. 2020, 2014$ (in thousand 9,800 11,422 1,561 3,070 -----22,058 9,862 8,000 25,500 -----62,050 29,223 4,100 6,700 33,323 68,750 Source: Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014; BERK, 2015. Revenue sources have been identified for each project, regardless of 6 or 20 -year, with revenue sources coming from either 1) user fee assessments, 2) grants and ULIDs, or 3) user fee assessments/grants and ULIDs. Exhibit 79 summarizes the amount of long-term revenue sources in each revenue source category that is expected to fund projects beyond in the short and long term. Exhibit 79. Wastewater Planned Projects Expected Revenues 2016-2036, YOE$ (in thousa Greater detail on project costs and funding for the six year capital improvements list is found in the City's annual Capital Improvements Program, incorporated by reference as amended. Greater detail on the 20 -year plan is found in the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, City of Bremerton and HDR, Final December 2014, hereby incorporated by reference. Where there is a conflict between the six- year Capital Improvements Program and the six-year project list in the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, the six-year Capital Improvements Program will control. Periodically the City will review and evaluate the 20 -year Wastewater Plan; when amendments are prepared this CFP can be updated accordingly. UGA ►lysis The analysis above includes UGA population with the City population estimates given the existing wastewater service area. See "New Service Areas" projects in Exhibit 77. Overview Stormwater facilities in Bremerton are managed by the Bremerton Public Works & Utilities department. The stormwater utility in Bremerton was formed by ordinance in 1994 in order to create a funding source for the stormwater program. Bremerton regulates storm drain activities in Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 15.04 and uses King County's design standards for facility design. Bremerton's Stormwater Management Program is meant to reduce the discharge Stormwater Biofiltration Treatment of pollutants to the maximum extent practicable and protect the positive uses of the local waters that receive the stormwater drainage. (Bremerton, 2015 Stormwater Management Program (SWMP), 2015) A Stormwater Management Program is regularly updated and summarizes the program's activities that are permitted under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit. The permit was issued by Washington State in January of 2015 and expires in 2018. Bremerton's Public Works & Utilities Department administers, coordinates, implements, provides compliance oversight and reporting for the permit. (Bremerton, 2015 Stormwater Management Program (SWMP), 2015) The mission of the stormwater program is to control flooding, enhance water quality, protect sensitive habitat areas, and optimize the recharge of local aquifers. As part of the efforts to manage stormwater, the city has devoted recent efforts to increasing the capacity of the system and reducing CSO overflows. (Bremerton, 2015 Stormwater Management Program (SWMP), 2015) Inventory The existing stormwater drainage system is a system of drainage swales and pipes which collect water and route it away from homes and businesses. Drainage facilities discharge into Sinclair Inlet, Dyes Inlet, or Port Washington Narrows Exhibit 80 lists the City of Bremerton's stormwater basins, their drainage location, and their size. Exhibit 80. Facilities Inventory — -Stormwater Source: Bremerton City Services Appendix, 2004 ® e . Room Anderson Avenue N. shores of W. Bremerton Port Washington Narrows 400 Callow Avenue Central W. Bremerton - Sinclair Inlet 650 Sinclair Inlet Cherry Avenue E. Bremerton NE of Warren Port Washington Narrows 250 Ave. Bridge East Park E. Bremerton S of Sylvan Way Port Washington Narrows 330 Kitsap Lake W. Bremerton surrounding Chico Bay 1,550 Kitsap Lake - Chico Bay Oyster Bay NW part of W. Bremerton - Oyster Bay and Ostrich Bay 1,575 Oyster Bay & Ostrich Bay Pacific Avenue SE part of W. Bremerton - Sinclair Inlet 150 Sinclair Inlet Phinney Bay N Central part of W. Phinney Bay 225 Bremerton - Phinney Bay Pine Road W. part of E. Bremerton Port Washington Narrows 680 Sinclair Park SW portion of Bremerton 1,400 Stevens Canyon E. Bremerton in vicinity of Port Washington Narrows 350 Wheaton/Sylvan Tracyton Beach Along W. edge of city limits Port Washington Narrows 60 in E. Bremerton Trenton Avenue E part of E Bremerton Port Washington Narrows 670 and Port Orchard Bay Warren Avenue Downtown Bremerton Port Washington Narrows 275 Total Basins 8,565 Source: Bremerton City Services Appendix, 2004 Level er°vice Determination Level of service for stormwater activities are regulated by the city code and the design standards are regulated by the county standards (which comply with state regulations). All land development are conditioned to meet water quality, runoff control, and erosion control requirements of the county design manual. The manual requires development to provide water quality enhancements at 91 percent of the runoff volume generated at the project site. Additional details on design criteria can be found in the NPDES permit for Western Washington Phase II, which is issued by Ecology to the City of Bremerton. Projects Exhibit 81 contains a list of capacity and non -capacity projects planned over the next six years. The City anticipates developing a stormwater management plan in the 2016-2018 period to define both short term and long term needs. Although there are no stormwater capital projects currently planned during the 2022 — 2036 time period, Bremerton is expected to have capital spending needs for stormwater during that time. Exhibit 81. Stormwater Planned Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015 1 in YOE$ (in thousands ONION MEN= 12,309 TBD 1,879 TBD 20,633 8,302 Exhibit 82 contains the cost for capital investments over the next six years. There is no available project list available beyond 2021. Approximate total costs for planned projects between 2016 and 2021 are around $29 million. Exhibit 82. Stormwater Planned Projects Cost, in YOE$ (in thousands) * Capacity versus non -capacity projects were categorized by BERK. Note: Total costs for stormwater are an approximation. Project numbers and lists and are subject to change with the adoption of the 2016 CIP. Projects costs beyond 2021 were not identified. Exhibit 83. Stormwater Planned Projects Revenues, in YOE$ (in thousands) Source: City of Bremerton, 2015; BERK, 2015. Greater detail on project costs and funding for the six year capital improvements list is found in the City's annual Capital Improvements Program, incorporated by reference as amended. UGA ►lysis West Bremerton and Gorst. The majority of long-term stormwater projects identified are within the Gorst annexation area. Additional NPDES-related stormwater projects are anticipated across all UGAs (see Exhibit 84). • All UGAs. It is anticipated that the NPDES regulatory framework adopted by the City of Bremerton would facilitate the planning and building of new stormwater structures within any one or all of the UGAs. To date, no NPDES related capital improvement projects have been identified nor funding sources identified. However, upon annexation, NPDES related projects may add costs and/or impacts to stormwater capital facility planning over the long-term. Gorst. Between one to seven projects (Cost: up to $1.86 million). The Gorst Creek Watershed Plan identifies 35 sites within the watershed that need stormwater improvements. Of these projects, 11 are within the Gorst UGA. These projects are shown in Exhibit 84 below. Exhibit 84 Long-term Stormwater Capital Facility Needs for the Gorst UGA (2018 - 2035) Projects WSDOT Hwy 3 flooding Hillside seepage & stream overbank flooding Storm drain piping & sink hole Highway flooding from two creeks Stream overtopping Gorst Creek floodplain flooding Roadway undermining and culvert clogging Private storm sewer piping creating sink hole & fish passage barrier Upstream Culvert 12 inlet flooding and fish passage, Map ID #111010 Costs Designated Responsibility $174,000 City $99,000 City $216,000 City $3,224,000 WSDOT $1,049,000 City $15,000 City $13,000 City $456,000 Non -city, County, State $292,000 City Water quality concerns with yard flooding $0 Water quality with private pond $0 Total $5,538,000 Source: Kitsap County/City of Bremerton Gorst Creek Watershed Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan, 2013. The plan provides initial cost estimates for these projects and lists the entity responsible for each project. Of the 11 projects in the Gorst UGA, seven are designated the responsibility of the City of Bremerton. These seven projects total $1.86 million. Responsibility for stormwater projects is based on the Gorst Creek Watershed Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan Technical Memorandum completed in September, 2013. Discussions with the City of Bremerton Public Works Department indicate that they believe the City is only responsible for projects in the public right-of-way, which is just one project totaling $13,000. There are also three sites where the responsibility is uncertain. These uncertain projects' costs total $771,000. As a result, potential long-term stormwater capital costs vary widely based on how responsibility is ultimately assigned. To be conservative, the City may want to assume the maximum of $1.86 million when considering the full impacts of annexation. Once Gorst residents begin paying into the City's stormwater fund, the City may be expected to partner on drainage issues on both public and private party. East Bremerton. A separate study is not available for the East Bremerton area, but the area is addressed by Kitsap County's Surface Water Management Program. The East Bremerton area is addressed in the Kitsap County Capital Facility Plan, incorporated by reference, as adopted. a Overview The City of Bremerton's Water Utility system serves more than 56,000 residents in Bremerton and surrounding unincorporated areas, which represents more than a third of drinking water supplies in county -wide. The service area is around 13,000 acres, with around one half of water demand going to those within city limits and the other half going to the Navy water systems and those outside of Bremerton. (Bremerton Water System Plan Update, 2012) Bremerton owns and operates its main system and the West 517 Zone, sells water, operations, and maintenance to the Rocky Point Water District, and sells water to the Naval Base, Jackson Park Naval Housing, Port Orchard's Main System, and Port Orchard's McCormick System. (Bremerton Water System Plan Update, 2012) Exhibit 85. Water Service Area �n A „ V � � �iiaiiiiiiiiiiiiiU/iii , v � �,wmmm /ii " r t %/ tISS ww �. ra � r a xv � ��� V � // i ✓w, i a �iI /// �i%iaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaii�aaaaaaaaaai�� °" "fes iiiiiiiiiiii�//u ry i z/F r 1 f rte" A y� � K „%.00, J „t r �� ri 111W u �m Source: City of Bremerton, 2015. Capacity ►ter Rights The City's Water System Plan documents that surface water from the Union River and groundwater from production wells constitute the source for potable water for Bremerton city residents and other water service areas. All water in use by Bremerton has been properly appropriated through certificates of water rights or registered claims. The agency with regulatory oversight of water rights is the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). Exhibit 86 shows the quantity of water rights for the City of Bremerton. GROUND WATER Exhibit 86. Bremerton Water Ri 5,743 8.27 5,100 7.3 17,952 25.9 11,220 16.2 With Bremerton's dual sources (surface and ground water), both current and forecasted 2031 average day demands and maximum day demands can be met. Not all water rights are available; installed capacity and pump installation or repairs will need to occur to make that capacity available. The City's Water System Plan also notes that Bremerton has the following pending water right actions (Bremerton Water System Plan Update, 2012): • Change of amount for Well 9 (1,000 gpm) • New application for Well 21 (500 gpm) • New Application for Well 22 (1,000 gpm) Water system plan projections project that the total average day demand for water will increase from the current level of about 7 million gallons per day (MGD) to about 10 MGD in the year 2031, an increase of about 43 percent. The projected maximum day demand (MDD) for the year 2031 is 19.41 MGD. (Water System Plan, 2012) The population projections for 2036 would further increase the demand beyond 2031. However, the City's combined surface and ground water rights can accommodate more than the projected population. See Exhibit 87 and Exhibit 88. Exhibit 87. Average Day Demand Analysis for 2031 2' ....... ...... ,, kul 0 N 21112 2213 20114 2015 2016 2017 2018 41019 X20 2021 24222 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 202S 21029 203 2031 N Instal led Source Capacity ")m�,,AI D Der and Exhibit 88. Maximum Day Demand Analysis for 2031 611 .�m 40 30� 4Gv ......... 20 .w "������ 1.0 20112 2013 20114 2015 20116 2017 2019 24219 2020 24221 2022 2023 2024 2029 20264 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 SW + CSW iii Rights W Qi Rights Only Installed Q Source Capacity Demand Source: City of Bremerton Water System Plan, 2012. Water Quality Drinking water is tested regularly at the source and throughout the distribution system. The regulatory agencies providing oversight of drinking water quality are the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Health. Bremerton's Water Utility meets all standards set by the federal Safe Drinking Water Act and state laws and regulations. Bremerton's water supplies come from the well -protected Union River headwaters and groundwater from wells. The City owns and protects the 3,000 -acre watershed surrounding the Union River, and protects it with limited and patrolled access. As a result, Bremerton's water system needs minimal treatment and it meets all protective standards set by federal and state agencies. The Union River supply, in particular, is of such exceptional quality that it is one of the few surface water systems in the country that is allowed by the Department of Health to be unfiltered. For more information, see the City of Bremerton Drinking Water Quality Report 2015. Inventory Exhibit 89 lists the facilities inventory for the Bremerton Water Utility. Exhibit 89 Facilities Inventory— Bremerton Water Utilities Systems Exhibit 90 lists the aquifers and the well facilities available in the Bremerton Water Utility system, with the capacity of the wells in gallons per minute. Exhibit 90. Facilities Inventory — Aquifers and Wells `® FY9I 1 .4. .4 Anderson Creek Shallow Artesian Aquifer 1R, 2R, 3 2100 Anderson Creek Deep Artesian Aquifer Number of Connections 18,000 63 18,063 Population Served 53,000 1,000 54,000 Miles of Pipe 300 11 311 Storage Capacity (MG) 32 1.2 33 Reservoirs 3 Raw, 16 Treated 2 21 Pump Stations 10 1 11 Pressure Booster Stations 3 1 4 Pressure Reducing Stations 14 2 16 Pressure Relief Valves 7 2 9 Service Area (acres) 12,100 3,786 15,886 Pressure Zones W256, W550, W517, W517 8 zones W650, E240, E398, E490 Source: Bremerton City Services Appendix, 2004; Bremerton Drinking Water Quality Report, 2015. Exhibit 90 lists the aquifers and the well facilities available in the Bremerton Water Utility system, with the capacity of the wells in gallons per minute. Exhibit 90. Facilities Inventory — Aquifers and Wells `® FY9I 1 .4. .4 Anderson Creek Shallow Artesian Aquifer 1R, 2R, 3 2100 Anderson Creek Deep Artesian Aquifer 6R, 7, 8 2400 Twin Lakes Aquifer 15, 17, 18, 19, 20 2820 Gorst Sea Level Aquifer 16 140 Gorst Valley Aquifer 22 233.5 Manette Sea Level Aquifer 13,14 625 Meadowdale Aquifer 21 500 Parkwood East Aquifer 9 0 Tota 1 8,818.5 Source: Water System Plan, 2012. Bremerton assumes 200 gallons per equivalent residential unit for average daily demand. This has been factored into the expected residential, commercial, industrial, and other growth and projected in the description of capacity and water rights above. • The 2011 Water System Plan estimate of city population is 35,279 and the 2031 population is 50,970, an increase of 15,691. • The 2015 population is 39,410 and the projected 2036 population in the city per this CFP is 53,107. The expected net change in population is 13,997. If considering the CFP population estimates and associated growth rate, the CFP's 2031 estimate is 49,679 below the 2031 Water System Plan estimate of 50,970. The Water System Plan demonstrates the City has far more source capacity and water rights than the 2031 population, and it is anticipated the Water Utility would have more than sufficient water rights to meet the 2036 population estimate. See Exhibit 87 average daily demand in comparison to the supply. Further the City's Water Utility service area includes West Bremerton, Gorst, and East Bremerton UGAs as well as half of the Central Kitsap UGA. • Over 5,367 population growth is projected in the Water System Plan between 2011 and 2031. • The projected UGA population within Bremerton's assigned UGA is less than 5,000. The Central Kitsap UGA would have another share of population. Given the combined surface water and groundwater rights, and with necessary storage, treatment and distribution facilities extended as growth occurs, the City would be expected to be able to serve the City and UGA combined. Projects The Bremerton Water Utility anticipates having sufficient water rights to meet demands in the near future. Certain rehabilitation and maintenance projects will need to be completed to ensure that the wells that source some of the water resources continue to run and enable access to the water. The 2012 Bremerton Water System Plan Update put the total cost of capital improvements from 2012 through 2031 at $85 million in 2012 dollars, to be funded through developer extensions, capital facility charges, state and federal loan programs, rates, and bonds. Some capital improvement funds over the next 20 years will be used for a water filtration treatment facility, but not before Bremerton is required to switch from an unfiltered to a filtered system. (Bremerton Water System Plan Update, 2012) Exhibit 91 summarizes capacity and non -capacity projects planned over the 2016-2036 period. Matching the revenue and capital cost analysis in Chapter 2, a 3% inflation rate is used consistent with recent trends. Exhibit 91. Water Planned Projects, YOE$ (in thousands) *UFA = User fee assessment; G = Grants & ULID Source: City of Bremerton Department of Public Works & Utilities, 2015; BERK, 2015. Cost eve e Exhibit 92 and Exhibit 93 contain the cost and funding sources for capital investments over the next six years and through 2036. The 2012 Water System Plan Update identified the following capital financing strategy and funding resources: • Accumulated capital cash reserves; • Annual revenue collected from GFCs; • Annual transfers of excess cash (over minimum balance targets) from the Operating Fund, if any (rate funded system reinvestment); • Interest earning on capital fund balances and other miscellaneous capital resources; • Revenue bond financing. Should the City need to issue new revenue bonds to fund capital projects, a new rate study would be commissioned that will determine an appropriate level of rate adjustment. Exhibit 92. Water Planned Projects Cost, YOE$ (in thousands) Source: City of Bremerton, 2016; BERK, 2016. Planned revenues are estimated based on proportionate share of several revenue sources in the 2012 Water System Plan Update. * Based on the 2012 Water System Plan Update, Capital Funding Strategy. Source: City of Bremerton, 2016; BERK, 2016; City of Bremerton Water System Plan, 2012. Greater detail on project costs and funding for the six year capital improvements list is found in the City's annual Capital Improvements Program, incorporated by reference as amended. UGA ►lysis The Water System Plan identifies improvements throughout the City's Water Utility Service area including the UGAs. Highlights for particular UGAs are included below. West Bremerton and Gorst. (Cost: Up to $1.1 million). Currently, the City's Water Utility provides drinking water to the Gorst, Navy Yard City, and West Hills annexation areas as part of the Bremerton Service Area. The City also ultimately supplies drinking water to the Rocky Point annexation area but its relationship to Rocky Point remains unique. In particular, although Rocky Point conveyed its water system infrastructure to the City in 1952, the area has maintained its own special purpose water district with an elected three-person board of commissioners with responsibilities for administration, planning, and capital improvements. This structure currently results in redundant costs for Rocky Point residents. Upon annexation the City would likely enter into negotiations with the Rocky Point Water District for potential inclusion within the City of Bremerton water utility. Prior to assumption by the City, should that occur, improvements may need to be completed within the Rocky Point Water District, financed by non -City funding sources. These improvements have an estimated cost of approximately $1.1 million. (BERK Consulting, 2015) East Bremerton. The cumulative analysis of water demand in the Water System Plan includes the East Bremerton UGA. Overview Bremerton Public School District No. 100-C is the public education system for most parts of Bremerton and unincorporated areas adjacent to the City. A small area of the city is served by South Kitsap School District #402. The Jackson Park Naval Reservation is adjacent to the school district and Bremerton School system enrollment is directly related to the military base. (Bremerton School District No. 100-C: Study and Survey, 2012) Since the vast majority of the City is served by the Bremerton School District, only the Bremerton School District is included in the analysis. Bremerton Graduation 2015 None of the school facilities serving Bremerton that are operated by the South Kitsap School Districts are in Bremerton's city limits. Facilities used by the Bremerton School District include elementary (K-5), middle (6-7), junior high (8-9), and senior high (10-12) schools, as well as a regional technical school. Since the technical school is regional and serves a population county -wide, it is not included in the inventory. Within these schools, class sizes vary by grade. Exhibit 94 shows the inventory for facilities in the Bremerton School District as of 2012 (excluding the technical school, which has capacity for around 515 regional students). The location of facilities is shown on Exhibit 95. Exhibit 94. Facilitv Inventory— Bremerton School District The Bremerton School District has identified that their classrooms are listed at a certain capacity, however the rooms tend to be overcrowded at that capacity and are often not utilized at capacity numbers. This should be taken into consideration for future capital planning. (Steedman, 2015) Exhibit 95. Bremerton Schools r l a pitFlo ' o�rr, r r�` Cuty'tb& P�+rt {7!r.r9rtaud Gdy of Port Orchard Vt� �',IIII Bremerton Schaal District Facilities BremertonGch©©I Distrid 4 1001-G City l -emits 1-7 �� UG,�, BC4 LI II daIPTy" �� VIII IIII P. rks o d� Military �l ❑ Bremerton East UG,A w,+ 1-1 Bremerton West .UGA o as L I , i , ❑ Bremerton Gorst, UGA Alli= '�IDf n E�urwe Kitap C�un,.yZ:,,,4Fehr &P�rz2:05,BEP 2DI5 FFHR � PFFR.S � 111131EIIK, Level er°vice Determination There are no District specific LOS standards for the Bremerton School District. Based on State Initiative 1351, class sizes by grade would serve as a capacity standard as follows: General education average class size • Grades K-3: 17 • Grade 4-12: 25 Schools with >50% in poverty • Grades K-3: 15 • Grade 4: 22 • Grade 5-12: 23 For comparisons of student generation to existing capacity a student per household ratio as of 2012 (the year of the School District's last study) is applied to the expected city population. While there is currently surplus capacity in elementary and secondary schools in the Bremerton School District, there could be a need for investment in additional schools as the population grows significantly by 2036. This will be especially true in the elementary schools since around half of the system's students are in the elementary facilities. Exhibit 96shows the capacity surplus and deficit through 2036 with the current school facilities. * Student per Household Ratio is based on analysis done by the Bremerton School District in the 2014 Enrollment Trends and Projections report and reflects an enrollment analysis done in 2014 and based on permits from 2009 to 2014. The Bremerton School District analysis determined that there were 37 students per 100 single family or townhomes and 22 students per 100 apartments. This analysis applies that student generation rate to the household estimates for Bremerton, and uses the structure type split from the 2009 through 2013 American Community Survey estimates Source: BERK, 2015; Bremerton School District, 2014; 5 -Year ACS DP04, 2009 - 2013. In the 2014 Enrollment Trends and Projections study by the Bremerton School District, questions about the future of the school district's enrollment are considered. The report responds to fluctuations in the district's enrollment as a result of birth trends, home sales and construction, and population growth. Up until 2012, enrollment had been trending downward for around 20 years. Given the pipeline for new housing in Bremerton, the school district is optimistic that enrollment could grow significantly and that the enrollment share of students in Kitsap County will continue to improve. (Enrollment Trends and Projections, 2014) Given the pipeline for growth, current preliminary or final permit approvals will contribute most highly to enrollment at the West Hills facility. (Enrollment Trends and Projections, 2014) Projects In order to meet the needs of the diverse population of students in Bremerton, the school district has made recent facility additions from 2005 — 2008, which were added to the existing stock of 18-25 year old facilities. However, in addition to the facility investments made from 2005 through 2008, some short term upgrades and some longer term additions and replacements are being considered. (Bremerton School District No. 100-C: Study and Survey, 2012) Exhibit 97 contains a list of capacity and non -capacity projects planned over the next 20 years. Exhibit 97. Schools Planned Projects: 2012 (in thousands) Source: Bremerton School District No. 100-C Study and Survey, 2012; BERK, 2015; OSPI School Construction Assistance, 2015. Cost and Revenue The Bremerton School District has an allowable bonded indebtedness of over $177 million and the District is eligible for matching funds from the state (Bremerton School District No. 100-C: Study and Survey, 2012). Exhibit 98 contains the cost sources for capital investments over the next six years and through 2036. Category I (Capacity Projects Required to Meet LOS) 7 West Hills STEM Capacity Expansion State Funding 4,000 Assistance, Bonds Category II (Non -Capacity Projects Needed for Maintenance and Operations West Hills Re -Roof Bonds .... 700 .... Kitsap Lake Re -Roof Bonds 600 Crown Hill Re -Roof Bonds 600 View Ridge Re -Roof Bonds 600 Administration Building Re -Roof Bonds 500 Memorial Stadium Restroom/Concessions Bonds 400 Upgrade Fire Alarm Panels multiple sites State Funding 500 Assistance, Bonds Update Student Technology Bonds 500 Replace telephone system Bonds 900 Add Surveillance cameras Bonds 300 Demolish old East High building except for gyms Bonds 100 Fix parking and traffic Bonds 1,200 Upgrade sports fields at MVMS, Memorial Stadium, and old Bonds 1,200 East High site Add fire sprinklers to the Admin Building Bonds Note: Revenue sources are based on criteria outlined in the School Const. Assistance overview. http://www.k12.wa.us/SchFaciIities/pubdocs/FoIio_final_web_spreads.pdf. They are subject to change. Source: Bremerton School District No. 100-C Study and Survey, 2012; BERK, 2015; OSPI School Construction Assistance, 2015. Cost and Revenue The Bremerton School District has an allowable bonded indebtedness of over $177 million and the District is eligible for matching funds from the state (Bremerton School District No. 100-C: Study and Survey, 2012). Exhibit 98 contains the cost sources for capital investments over the next six years and through 2036. Exhibit 98. Schools Planned Projects Cost (in thousands, 2011$) Note: The Bremerton School District future plans included approximate cost but does not specify the years for planned projects other than a range of 10-15 years from the date of the 2012 study, which may mean 2022 or 2027. This model assumes these projects will all occur by 2036. Source: Bremerton School District No. 100-C Study and Survey, 2012; BERK, 2015. The school district has capital facilities that are eligible for matching funds and intends to address maintenance and facility needs that are not match -able. Revenue sources for the capital projects is assumed to come from the following sources: • Voter -approved capital levies • Capital bonds According to Bremerton School District staff, capital planning for the Bremerton School District will be considered again in 2017. (Bremerton School District No. 100-C: Study and Survey, 2012) South Kitsap c istrict and CentralKitsap c istrict Exhibit 99 shows the boundaries for all school districts in Kitsap County, as well as the locations of the schools in each of the districts. A portion of the city limits and most of Bremerton's assigned UGAs are served by South Kitsap School District (SKSD) and Central Kitsap School District (CKSD) (e.g. portions of East Bremerton, West Bremerton, Gorst, and PSIC-Bremerton). Exhibit 99. Kitsap County School District Boundaries Source: Kitsap County Department of Community Development, 2015. s(I District 0011nss Schaal q acations a8scad asType 1 � Bainbridge Island (303) College Bremerton (l00-) �1 Central Ki' Elementary �nnt Kitsap (40t} �' North Kitsap (400) High North Mason (403 � South Kitsap (402) Miiddle Designated urban Growth Areas Other i � [ unincorporated Urban Growth area Incorporated city toIinsC+nn eacc� " i hway tow u " R: Major Road M� Collector /Arterial r ibdas is r Local l Axess, LocaI Road �� a a eW Railroad Lines k 5U➢ IK a /�I /����/ �� AI it/,// / // / / N��{ p,.WAS �µ` O'Nc��ly L) NJ /� ����j% � ����i/�ll%/l f G �y `,`� ,n� /� ..:Yd4 � '✓s, wmw w�uow. / % nr� w �; (F C, r ' AU a i / �,. Y rGk IaumarlW� it f r7¢ al J Ih f d r f E . TI Itl ti " ,nut„ as tai a �wm�mr�¢tr, rs w III,, Infri,.. dk 4' Mdfl� d rr41A 16kNld tl'JT Nl FW J J1tM A"y tl'9 IbJf fte w uwuoww 04, RASk'G R4 tl a9 h q.?nC {! VWVCYMatlCr �, 4 �1 / roily Yrx,,te ndI � 4i Zw t, WY ri,,AYaAM/Adt lUff J(uiAYbllCrt,�A},SF Et"Y � - � I l a n r �. as r i t err r A:� a � r` d µ a�a roa u^e ry � u aer'an ar w,yreur r, r rw�ru7"neriry u �' ,y..,„ h JW '!A Af 4 k / ArF IfiMM+54 H�#muruM1�a NP YJS�p : I H j m''.: X �frtit nr�W a{ iEn},r{r� pr pl9�n rv�i ` 4 6 , P�iaWllvk�e.p CYatn. ,e.pfeank�.ei'3C, �bV"w � � �Y�67N}M'➢ I � } 4 .. w tGasarn Caurlty 4egartaoent arCamrruualGy 17euetapraenrt 6 !sicn SiteMS-ata, POROrcharta, Washington 98366 i - VOICE (360) :137.5777 FAX (360).3:37-4925 Source: Kitsap County Department of Community Development, 2015. Exhibit 100 shows an estimate of student generation based on household estimates for Bremerton's UGA and the Bremerton School District's 2014 analysis of enrollment trends representing a lower range student generation level. An upper range is based on SKSD's rates. Exhibit 100. Student Generation — Bremerton UGA * Student per Household Ratio is based on analysis done by the Bremerton School District in the 2014 Enrollment Trends and Projections report and reflects an enrollment analysis done in 2014 and based on permits from 2009 to 2014. The Bremerton School District analysis determined that there were 37 students per 100 single family or townhomes and 22 students per 100 apartments. This analysis applies that student generation rate to the household estimates for Bremerton, and uses the structure type split from the 2009 through 2013 American Community Survey estimates. Source: BERK, 2015; Bremerton School District, 2014; 5 -Year ACS DP04, 2009 - 2013. Capital planning for these districts is outlined in the 20123 Kitsap County Capital Facilities Plan, and each district's six-year capital facilities plan, incorporated by reference as amended. ? 1, Solid waste collection is accomplished by Waste Management Northwest in accordance with an agreement with the City of Bremerton. The hauler provides curbside collection of garbage, recycling and yard/food waste for all residents and businesses. In Washington, state law requires that counties plan for integrated solid waste management systems that prioritizes waste reduction and recycling (RCW 70.95) as well as managing moderate risk waste, such as household hazardous waste (RCW 70.105). Solid waste disposal services in Bremerton are managed by Kitsap County Public Works. Although Kitsap County owns the solid waste facilities, they are operated by Waste Management Washington, Inc. (WMWI). WMWI owns and operates a landfill with capacity for 50 to 100 years with additional land with potential for permitting further capacity. The Kitsap County 2011 Waste Wise Communities: The Future of Solid and Hazardous Waste Management in Kitsap County and Kitsap County Capital Facilities Plan 2012, as amended, are adopted by reference. 3 Prior to June 2016 the City may determine if the school districts have updated plans or if the 2016 Kitsap County Capital Facilities Plan is available for incorporation by reference. Overview Electricity service in Bremerton is provided by Puget Sound Energy (PSE), which is a privately held, investor-owned utility formed in 1997 with the merger between Puget Sound Power & Light Company and Washington Natural Gas. PSE is the largest electric utility in Washington State, with more than one million electric customers and a service area of 6,000 square miles, primarily in the Puget Sound region. PSE electricity is generated from a variety of sources, including hydroelectric power, thermal power plants, coal, natural gas, wind power, and more. In 2013, the PSE fuel mix for electricity was 31% coal, 32% hydroelectric, 28% natural gas, 7% wind, 1% nuclear, and 1% other. (Puget Sound Energy 2015a) PSE serves over 115,000 electric customers in Kitsap County and maintains over 132 miles of high- voltage transmission and distribution lines throughout the county. (Puget Sound Energy, 2015; Brobst, Municipal Liaison Manager, 2015) PSE has divided Kitsap County into two sub -areas (north and south) for the purposes of electric facilities planning. The North Kitsap sub -area is generally from Hood Canal in the north to Sinclair Inlet in the south, and includes Bremerton. The South Kitsap sub -area is generally from Sinclair Inlet to the south county boundary. (Kitsap County, 2012) Electricity serving the Bremerton area arrives in Kitsap County via 230 kilovolt (kV) transmission lines operated by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). These 230 kV lines arrive at a BPA substation in Gorst and then connect to PSE's South Bremerton substation. From this substation, 115kV distribution lines provide power to PSE customers throughout the area. (AECOM and BERK, 2013) Inventory & Capacity Electrical facilities in Kitsap County, including Bremerton, include the following: • Transmission Switching Stations — South Bremerton, Foss Corner, and Valley Junction. • Transmission Substations— South Bremerton, Bremerton. • Distribution Substations — Port Gamble, Christensen's Corner, Miller Bay, Silverdale, Central Kitsap, Bucklin Hill, Tracyton, McWilliams, Chico, Sinclair Inlet, South Keyport, Fernwood, Manchester, Long Lake, Fragaria, East Port Orchard, Sheridan, Rocky Point, Poulsbo, Bremerton, Port Madison, Murden Cove, and Winslow, Serwold, Kingston. • Transmission Lines 115 kV — Foss Corner -Salisbury Point, Foss Corner-Murden Cove, Port Madison Tap, Valley Junction -Foss Corner, Bremerton-Keyport, Foss Corner-Keyport, South Bremerton - Bremerton, South Bremerton -Valley Junction, O'Brien -Long Lake, South Bremerton -Long Lake, South Bremerton-Fernwood Tap, Fernwood Tie, and Bremerton -Navy Yard. Foss Corner - US Navy at Bangor, Miller Bay to Kingston. • Other Facilities — Command Point Cable Station and Salisbury Point Cable Station. (Kitsap County, 2012; Brobst, Municipal Liaison Manager, 2015) Long-range plans are developed by PSE's Total Energy System Planning Department and are based on electrical growth projections. County population projections produced by the OFM are used to determine new load growth for the next 20 years. Projected load is calculated as the existing load, minus conservation reductions, minus demand side management, plus forecast of new load. PSE's future electrical facilities plan is based on an estimated normal peak winter load. PSE plans to construct additional transmission and distribution facilities to meet demand. The exact timing of individual projects will be determined by the rate of load growth in specific areas. (Kitsap County, 2012) Projects South Bremerton switching station: PSE began construction on a series of upgrades to the South Bremerton switching station in 2011 to increase operational flexibility during outages. The improvements will provide increased consistency in the local power distribution system, but do not increase the capacity of the current electrical infrastructure. (Kitsap County, 2012) BPA Transmission Improvements: BPA is planning to reinforce the Olympic Peninsula with two additional 230 kV transmission lines between the Olympia area and Shelton. (Kitsap County, 2012) South Bremerton—Foss Corner 115/230 kV Transmission: This project will entail constructing a 115/230 kV transmission line between the South Bremerton transmission station and the Foss Corner switching station. The major portion of this line will be located on a right-of-way parallel to the Kitsap Bangor BPA line. One of the 115/230 kV transmission lines will link the South Bremerton transmission station to the BPA Fairmount transmission substation (Jefferson County) via the Foss Corner switching station and a submarine cable across Hood Canal. A second line from South Bremerton along the corridor will connect to Valley Junction via Silverdale substation. This project is currently in planning. (Kitsap County, 2012; Brobst, Municipal Liaison Manager, 2015) Long Lake Transmission Loop: This project, designed to improve the reliability of transmission service to south Kitsap County, expands the Long Lake Substation and creates a looped transmission feed and additional capacity between the station and South Bremerton. This project is completed. (Kitsap County, 2012; Brobst, Municipal Liaison Manager, 2015) Distribution Substations: Several new distribution substations are planned to serve the forecasted load. In North Kitsap, distribution substations are proposed in Tower, Sunset, Newberry, Werner, Brownsville, Agate Pass, and Fletcher. In South Kitsap, distribution substations are proposed in Helena, Colby, Bethel, Phillips, and Sunnyslope. These projects are currently all in planning stages. (Kitsap County, 2012; Brobst, Municipal Liaison Manager, 2015) Overview Natural gas provision in Bremerton is privately operated and maintained by Cascade Natural Gas Corporation (CNG), a subsidiary of MDU Resources Group, Inc., a multidimensional natural resources enterprise traded on the New York Stock Exchange. CNG serves more than 272,000 customers in 96 communities — 68 of which are in Washington and 28 in Oregon. Cascade serves a diverse territory covering more than 32,000 square miles and 700 highway miles from one end of the system to the other. Interstate pipelines transmit Cascade's natural gas from production areas in the Rocky Mountains and western Canada. The Cascade headquarters is located in Kennewick, Wash. (Cascade Natural Gas, 2015) CNG serves Bremerton and surrounding unincorporated areas. Note that service is not currently provided to all areas within the service area. Connections are initiated by customer demand and individual requests. CNG does not plan in advance for individual connections; instead, connections are initiated by customer requests for new construction or conversion. CNG expects to continue developing distribution systems and services to meet growth at the lowest possible cost by maximizing capacity of the existing distribution system. Cascade's customer base grows at a pace of 1% annually (Cascade Natural Gas, 2015). Factors important in implementing expansion of the CNG system include right-of-way acquisition, permitting, environmental impact assessments, coordination with other projects (e.g., road construction), and locations of other utilities. (Kitsap County, 2012) Projects The location, capacity, and timing of improvements to the natural gas system provided by CNG depend on growth in the area and demand for expansion of the system. How the system expands will depend on right-of-way permitting, environmental impact, and opportunities to install gas mains as new development or utility maintenance occurs. CNG has to manage both demand side and supply side investments in their system since they are both receiving and distributing natural gas resources. Cascade Natural Gas uses computer software to model individual service systems to determine constraint areas based on forecasts for demand. This allows CNG to determine where investments need to be made to meet demand for natural gas supplies. CNG has to manage both demand side (such as distribution capacity) and supply side (such as storage capacity) investments in their system since they are both receiving and distributing natural gas resources. (Cascade Natural Gas, 2014) The 20 -year Load Growth in the Bremerton District area is expected to be 20.8%. (Cascade Natural Gas, 2014) Increasing capacity on the existing system can occur through the following methods: • Increasing pressures in the existing lines to add supply and distribution capacity • Adding new supply and distribution mains for reinforcement • Increasing existing capacity through replacing existing mains with larger mains • Adding regulators from supply mains to add pressure gas sources that will meet the needs of new development Since connections to the system are driven by demand, they cannot be planned in advance of the customer request. CNG plans to continue expanding the distribution system to match growth in an efficient manner. Cascade Natural Gas has an Integrated Resource Plan and maintains 2 -year action plans. Projects planned in the Cascade Natural Gas Bremerton District area in the 2014 Plan include: • Silverdale Reinforcement @ HWY3 • Port Orchard Reinforcement: :� 1,850 ft of 4" PE. 2016 project • Manchester Reinforcement: :� 5,400 ft of 4" PE. 2017 project • Highway 3 Casing Removal: Replace casing/carrier pipe. High priority. • R-26 Relocate Bremerton Vault in narrow lot in residential area. Will require a new reg station with a building to reduce noise. Bremerton #2 priority. • R-64 Reg station in vault in street. Want to relocate, along with valve, to Walgreens property in Silverdale. Bremerton #5 priority. • V-22 Burwell and Callow in Bremerton. 8" Rockwell plug valve located in driveline at bottom of hill. Need to relocate to parking area, out of driveline. Bremerton #4 priority. • Chico Check Meter Bremerton Leaking Cameron valves • V-13 Bremerton Sidney Avenue and Radey Street in Port Orchard. In a vault in drivelane with a bad lid. Want to relocate to back of ROW or in an easement • Relocation, R-47 Relocate Bremerton County project to restore fish habitat. May replace or remove and add piping. • Relocation, R-146 Project Tremont Road. Includes relocating R-146, :400 ft of 2" steel IP main, X300 ft of 2" steel HP main, 1,500 ft of 4" steel HP main, and :�7 HPSS The telecommunications utilities discussed in this section include telephones, cable television, radio communication, and cellular telephones. The Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) regulates telephone and radio communications; cable television and cellular service are not under its jurisdiction. Telecommunications are subject to federal laws and regulations administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Telecommunication providers must also comply with local regulations such as land use and public rights-of-way. ,.�rwr,w ti�w Telephone service providers are require by state law to provide adequate telecommunications service on demand per Chapter 80.36.090 RCW. Telephone service providers are therefore required to provide services in a manner that accommodates growth within their service area, wherever it may occur. As such, telephone service providers generally do not conduct detailed long-range planning activities. General improvements and maintenance necessary keep the current system operational and to accommodate future growth are implemented as required. CenturyLink provides local and long-distance telephone service throughout Bremerton and Kitsap County and also provides digital television and DSL Internet (Washignton Utilities and Tranportation Commission, 2015). The Kitsap Public Utility District (KPUD) provides wholesale broadband internet access to retailers in Kitsap County, who in turn provide the service to citizens and businesses (Kitsap Public Utility District, 2015). A variety of other telecommunications companies also provide service in the Bremerton area. Cable television companies are regulated under the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, which is enforced by the FCC. Cable companies must enter franchise agreements with the City to regulate service rates according to FCC guidelines. The City's cable franchise agreement is with Comcast and was last renewed in 2013 (Ordinance 5218). Cellular Telephone Cellular telephone service in the Bremerton area is provided by a variety of national and regional carriers, including Verizon Wireless, AT&T, T -Mobile, Sprint, and Cricket Wireless. Cellular telephone providers are regulated directly by the FCC. Cellular service depends upon a series of transmitting antennae located on towers throughout a provider's service area. Additional antennae are constructed when a particular area begins to experience capacity overload, and providers will expand capacity in response to consumer demand. I The Kitsap County Comprehensive Plan released a Preferred Alternative in April of 2016, during Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan Update process. The County's Preferred Alternative identified a new growth number of 3,601 new residents between 2015 and 2036 for the Bremerton UGA area. The population number is 293 less than the UGA population growth number identified by Bremerton. The Bremerton City Services Appendix plans for the original UGA growth number of 3,894 between 2015 and 2036, while acknowledging that the County number is slightly lower. As a result, the City Services Appendix provides a conservative analysis by planning for a slightly higher number. The following section provides a brief summary of the scenario where Bremerton would expect a UGA growth number of 3,601 over the next 20 years. 6.1 Fire ic On average, the Fire Department received 0.19 calls per capita annually between 2003 and 2013, including both fire and EMS calls (Fire Department, 2015). Assuming that this rate continues, the UGA areas will add around 2,541 calls by 2036. These added calls will impact the Department's ability to respond quickly and it is likely that investments will be needed in order to run the service at the desired response time of 6.0 minutes. For more analysis on the impacts to fire and emergency services, see the "UGA Analysis" in Section 4.1. Given that annexation would result in around 3,600 new residents under the protection of the Bremerton law enforcement officials, Bremerton would need to make investments in the facilities as well as hire more officers on staff in order to meet LOS standards by 2036. An additional 7 officers and 1,750 square feet of facilities would be needed if the UGA area were annexed and served by the Bremerton Police Department. For more analysis on the impacts to law enforcement services, see the "UGA Analysis" in Section 4.2. The addition of 3,600 persons in the UGA would mean a total need for 11.2 acres of neighborhood parks and 20 acres of community parks, which is generally consistent with the park needs when planning for the larger UGA population number. For more analysis on impacts to parks and recreation, see the "UGA Analysis" in Section 4.3. 6.4 Public Buildings The level of service (LOS) standard for public buildings in the City of Bremerton maintains the current building square feet at the higher level of growth assumed, and no additional space is needed. For more analysis on the impacts of growth on public buildings see Section 4.4. 6.5 Transportation The small difference in population would result in a slightly reduced impact on the transportation system. See Transportation Appendix for more information. The sewer capital planning analysis includes the UGA areas. With the smaller growth number for the UGA there would be minimal impacts on capital needs for sewer. The sewer service needed in 2036 is 6.7 mgd, with the only difference being an interim need for 5.3 mgd in 2021 rather than 5.4 mgd (see Exhibit 101. LOS Comparison — City Limits and UGA — Wastewater Facilities). Exhibit 101. LOS Comparison — City Limits and UGA — Wastewater Facilities Note: Population numbers include the City of Bremerton and the Bremerton UGA. Projected population for the Kitsap County Sewer District No. 1 and the Naval Shipyard are not included since they are served by a contract that could be renegotiated. Source: City Services Appendix, 2004; Bremerton Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, 2014. For more analysis on the impacts to sewer/stormwater, see the "UGA Analysis" in Section 4.6. Level of service for stormwater activities are regulated by the city code and the design standards are regulated by the county standards (which comply with state regulations). All land development are conditioned to meet water quality, runoff control, and erosion control requirements of the county design manual. The manual requires development to provide water quality enhancements at 91 percent of the runoff volume generated at the project site. A change in UGA population by a few hundred residents is unlikely to have significant impacts on stormwater capital projects or on level of service. For more analysis on the impacts to stormwater, see the "UGA Analysis" in Section 4.7. 4 M - The lower UGA population number is not likely to significantly change water capital planning. The City's Water Utility service area currently includes West Bremerton, Gorst, and East Bremerton UGAs as well as half of the Central Kitsap UGA. The Water System Plan projects population growth between 2011 and 2031 of over 5,000 in the UGA area. With expected growth of 4,028 between 2012 and 2036, the Water System Plan is consistent with the expected growth numbers and the City would be expected to be able to serve the City and UGA combined regardless of the higher or lower population growth number for the UGA. For more analysis on the impacts to water, see the "UGA Analysis" in Section 4.8. (2014). 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update. City of bremerton. (2015). 2016 - 2021 Capital Improvement Plan. City of Bremerton. About Us. (2015). Retrieved from Cascade Natural Gas: http://cngc.com/utility-navigation/about-us AECOM and BERK. (2013). Gorst Draft Planned Action EIS. City of Bremerton. BERK Consulting. (2015). Fiscal Impacts of West Bremerton UGA and Gorst UGA Annexation. City of Bremerton: City of Bremerton. Berna, C. (2015, September 1). Park Planner. City of Bremerton. BMC 3.84. (n.d.). In Excise Tax on Real Estate Sales (p. Bremerton Municipal Code). City of Bremerton. (2004). Bremerton City Services Appendix. City of Bremerton. (2012). Bremerton School District No. 100-C: Study and Survey. Bremerton School District. (2012). Bremerton Water System Plan Update. City of Bremerton. Bremerton, C. o. (2015). 2015 Stormwater Management Program (SWMP). City of Bremerton. Bremerton, C. o. (2015). Drinking Water Quality Report 2015. City of Bremerton. Brobst, T. (2015, August 24). Municipal Liaison Manager. (B. C. Melanie Mayock, Interviewer) Brobst, T. (2015, August 24). Puget Sound Energy Municipal Liaison Manager. (B. Consulting, Interviewer) Burchett, J. (2015, 8 21). Police Captain, City of Bremerton. (S. P. Allison Satter, Interviewer) Cascade Natural Gas. (2014). Integrated Resource Plan. Cascade Natural Gas. Cascade Natural Gas. (2015, August 24). About Us. Retrieved from cngc.com: http://www.cngc.com/utility-navigation/about-us City of Bremerton. (2004, December). City Services Element. City of Bremerton, Washington, US. (2015). City of Bremerton Drinking Water Quality Report 2015. City of Bremerton. County, K. (2012). Kitsap County Capital Facilities Plan Update. Kitsap County. DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics. (2009 - 2013). 5-YearACS. U.S. Census. Duke, A. (2015, August 21). Chief, Bremerton Fire Department. (A. S. Satter, Interviewer) Duke, A. (2015, August). Fire Chief. (B. Consulting, Interviewer) Electric Supply. (2015, August 21). Retrieved from Puget Sound Energy: http://pse.com/aboutpse/EnergySupply/Pages/Electric-Supply.aspx (2014). Enrollment Trends and Projections. Prepared by William L Kendrick, Consultant. Bremerton School District. Farley, J. (2015, July 13). Bremerton Fire Department seeks $4.5M levy for trucks, stations. Retrieved from Kitsap Sun: http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/local-news/bremerton-fire-department- seeks-45m-levy-for-trucks-stations_42966283 Fire Department. (2015). Retrieved August 7, 2015, from City of Bremerton: http://www.ci.bremerton.wa.us/168/Fire-Department Fire Department. (2015). Retrieved from City of Bremerton: http://www.ci.bremerton.wa.us/168/Fire- Department Gas Tax Increases by 7 Cents in Washington State. (2015, August 1). Seattle Times. Retrieved from http://www.seattIeti mes.com/seattle-news/gas-tax-i ncreases-by-7-cents-in-washington-state/ (2013). Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement, Volume 2. Prepared by Aecom & BERK Consulting. City of Bremerton, Kitsap County. Johnson, C. (2015). Director of Financial Services. (B. Consulting, Interviewer) City of Bremerton. Kitsap County. (2012). Kitsap County UGA Sizing and Composition Remand Draft Supplemental EIS. Port Orchard: Kitsap County. Kitsap Public Utility District. (2015, August 24). Retrieved from Telecom: http:..www.kpud.org/telecom.php Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council. (2014). Countywide Planning Policies. Retrieved from kitsapregionalcouncil.org: http://www.kitsapregionalcouncil.org/countywide_planning.php Mertes, J. D., & Hall, J. R. (1995). National Park, Recreation, Open Space and Greenway Guidelines. Arlington, VA: National Recreation and Park Assocation. OSPI Facilities & Organization School Construction Assistance Program Overview. (2015). Retrieved from WA Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction: http://www.kl2.wa.us/SchFacilities/pubdocs/Folio_final_web_spreads.pdf OSPI. (School Year 2014-2015). Report 1049 - Determination of Projected Enrollments. WA State Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. (2014). Parks, Recreation & Open Space Plan. Bremerton, WA.: City of Bremerton. PSE and Kitsap County Working Together. (2015, August 21). Retrieved from Puget Sound Energy: http://pse.com/aboutpse/psenewsroom/MediaKit/039_Kitsap.pdf Puget Sound Energy. (2015, August 21). Electric Supply. Retrieved from pse.com: http://pse.com/aboutpse/EnergySupply/Pages/Electric-Supply.aspx Real Estate Excise Tax. (2015, September 2). Retrieved from MSRC: http://mrsc.org/Home/Explore- Topics/Finance/Revenues/Real-Estate-Excise-Tax.aspx (2011). Resolution No. 005. City of Bremerton. Staffing Levels. (2015). Retrieved from City of Bremerton: http://www.ci.bremerton.wa.us/672/Staffing- Levels Steedman, G. (2015, August 25). Bremerton School District. (BERK, Interviewer) (2016). Urban Forest Management Plan. City of Bremerton. Washignton Utilities and Tranportation Commission. (2015, August 24). UTC Telecom Exchange Map 2014. Retrieved from Washignton Utilities and Tranportation Commission: http://utc.wa.gov/regulatedindustries/utilities/Documents/Service%2OMap.pdf (2012). Water System Plan. Prepared by KPFF Consulting Engineers, Public Works and Utilities. City of Bremerton. Table of Contents Greenhouse Gas Emissions..................................................................................................... EN Appendix -2 Background......................................................................................................................... EN Appendix -2 Actions to Reduce GHG Emissions...................................................................................... EN Appendix -3 Potential Strategies......................................................................................................... EN Appendix -3 Definitions............................................................................................................................. EN Appendix -11 AquiferMap.......................................................................................................................... EN Appendix -12 Geologically Hazardous Areas Map...................................................................................... EN Appendix -13 SurfaceGeology Map............................................................................................................ EN Appendix -14 Shorelines of Statewide Significance Map............................................................................ EN Appendix -15 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Greenhouse gas emissions consideration is relatively new concept for the City of Bremerton to be planning for. Along with the hiring of a consulting firm to assist us with the Comprehensive Plan Update, the request was made to provide the City some additional information that may help formulate specific strategies that can be considered and deliberated in the upcoming planning horizon. The following is further information for the City to consider to later adoption (or amending of existing code). Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction strategies identify ways in which federal, state, and local governments can assess greenhouse gas contributions and set priorities to reduce fossil fuel dependence and the potential negative impacts of climate change. The main way local governments can reduce emissions is by encouraging and incentivizing more sustainable behavior among residents. As part of the Comprehensive Plan Update, Bremerton is required to review and update policies related to sustainability and climate change. This describes the sustainability and climate change requirements from the state and the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). It also describes a range of sustainability strategies that could be adopted by City of Bremerton to reduce GHG emissions. The primary focus is to quantify their likely effectiveness, estimate their costs of implementation, and assess their feasibility and appropriateness in Bremerton. Background GHG emissions in Washington come from transportation (46%), electricity (20%), industrial sources (16%), residential and commercial buildings (9%), agriculture (6%) and waste (3%)1. To reduce emissions in Washington, the state has adopted legislation that sets emission reduction targets to: • Return to 1990 levels by 2020 • Reduce emissions to 25% below 1990 levels, by 2035 • Reduce emissions to 50% below 1990 levels, by 20502 These goals above are statewide reduction goals, across all sectors and sources of emissions. While these goals are enacted in state law, the state has not yet assigned targets for the regions of the state, nor for individual sectors (transportation, energy, housing, etc.) The federal government has also not yet set national GHG reduction goals, and current federal legislation being considered by Congress would require specific state goals and targets at least 2 years beyond the enactment of federal legislation. In the absence of specific requirements and guidance, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Transportation Policy Board has taken a proactive stance to address the state's climate change goals in the Transportation 2040 Update process.' http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/laws.htm RCW 70.235.020 a PSRC, Transportation 2040 Bremerton has already taken steps to address climate change by joining more than a dozen other cities across the region in signing the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. This initiative is supported by several sustainability actions Bremerton is engaging in citywide including: • Performing energy efficiency audits on City owned buildings and facilities • Working with Puget Sound Energy to retrofit City buildings • Replacing City traffic lights with LED • Encouraging City employees to find alternatives to driving alone and reduce emissions through their participation in the Commuter Trip Reduction Program • Investing over $10 million in nonmotorized improvements over the past five years It is important to note that some GHG reduction strategies can only be implemented at the state and federal level. Examples of these larger -scale actions that are currently under debate and that Bremerton can support include: • Adopting stricter fuel economy standards • Implementing market based approaches that put a price on carbon such as cap -and -trade and a carbon tax • Updating commercial and residential energy building codes and standards, as well as appliance and equipment energy conservation standards to be more energy efficient Actions to Reduce GHG Emissions Potential Strategies The following section identifies a range of sustainability strategies that Bremerton could use to reduce GHG emissions in the transportation, energy, and waste sectors. The strategies are grouped by three alternatives. Each alternative is modeled off of a low, medium, and high target scenario. Although the state has set statewide reduction goals across all sectors and sources of emissions, there are currently no assigned targets regionally. As a result, at this time PSRC does not require greenhouse gas reduction strategy implementation or target setting, thus this information is provided to set the context for conversations in the next planning cycle when this will likely be required to be implemented. The establishment of any target would go beyond what is required by law and would show Bremerton's commitment to sustainability. A library of strategies to reduce GHG emissions can be found in the tables following this section. Low Target Scenario A low target scenario assumes a GHG reduction of 1-5 percent from existing conditions. This level of reduction can be achieved by adopting a relatively simple and low cost sustainability strategy that reduces vehicle miles travelled (VMT) by five percent per capita, reduces solid waste by five percent per capita, and support energy efficient retrofits of existing buildings through low loan or grant programs. To reduce vehicle miles travelled by five percent, Bremerton could adopt policies that increase land use diversity where possible, and invest in bicycle, pedestrian, and transit infrastructure. Having different types of land use near one another can decrease VMT as trips between land use types are shorter and may be accommodated by non -auto modes of transport. The difficulties of implementing these policies and strategies can range depending on public resistance to land use and zoning changes and non -auto oriented improvements. However, these strategies can achieve a combined VMT reduction of up to 5 percent (with minimal implementation difficulties and low costs) or 12 percent (with greater implementation difficulties and costs). Medium Target Scenario A medium target scenario assumes a target reduction goal of 6-10 percent. To achieve this level, Bremerton could adopt a sustainability strategy similar to the preferred alternative within the PSIC- Bremerton Subarea Plano, in addition to the requirements established within the low target scenario (reduce VMT by five percent per capita, reduce solid waste by five percent per capita, and are 10 percent better than the state's minimum requirements. Comparable to the PSIC-Bremerton Subarea Plan, this strategy could include implementing a mandatory CTR program expanding vanpool/transit and requiring energy efficient outdoor lighting standards'. At the city level these options would require minimal financial contributions, as the majority of the fiscal responsibility would rely on the employers, developers, and taxpayers. There are some challenges implementing a more robust vanpool service in Bremerton such as high fares compared to drivers, and difficulties findings riders and drivers. However, given the success of vanpool services between Kitsap Transit and NBK-Bremerton, this could be an advantageous option for Bremerton to reduce VMT. High Target Scenario A high target scenario for Bremerton would be to reduce GHG by more than 10 percent. This could be achieved by more ambitious baseline targets to reduce VMT by ten percent per capita, reduce solid waste by ten percent per capita, and adopt building efficiency standards that require a LEED gold level of certification or higher. This strategy could be further supported by adopting land use strategies with more stringent growth restrictions, and which increase densities within Bremerton's city center. Increased residential and employment densities tend to have more concentrated trips and can be supportive of alternative modes of travel such as transit, whereas areas of low density tend to have dispersed trip patterns more conducive to trips made by personal vehicle. Implementing land use policies that support residential and employment densities are not without their implementation difficulties such as residents who fear increasing densities will damage the character of their neighborhoods. In addition, adopting an aggressive sustainability strategy requires a high level of funding. However, if these policies are adopted Bremerton could see a significant change in the way its residents travel and reduce total VMT by more than 10 percent. 4 Formerly the SKIA Subarea Plan Who Pays Evaluation Criteria for Transportation Demand Implementation Ln i = Range of Effectiveness Cost Q) � a Management (TDM) Difficulties a o Strategies i Q) E D TRANSPORTATION: PUBLIC MODE SUPPORT MEASURES Increases the Public Education and Low - effectiveness of other None ✓ ✓ ✓ Promotion medium strategies up to 3% Area -wide Ride matching 0.1-3.6% VMT reduction None Low ✓ ✓ Services Transit Services Up to 2.5% VMT Ongoing competition Medium- ✓ ✓ ✓ reduction for public funds high High fares compared to Up to 8.3% commute Vanpool Service transit; finding riders & Medium ✓ ✓ VMT reduction drivers Up to 2.5% regional Competition for public Transit and Vanpool Fares Medium ✓ ✓ ✓ VMT reduction funds; equity concerns Minimal for low cost 0-2% regional VMT Non -Motorized Modes actions; great for high Low -high ✓ ✓ ✓ reduction cost actions Up to 1.5% VMT High cost; public Medium- HOV Facilities reduction &.2% trip ✓ acceptance high reduction Park and Ride Lots 0-0.5% VMT reduction None Medium- ✓ high TRANSPORTATION: EMPLOYER BASED TDM MEASURES 8-18% trip reduction at Tax implications for Low- Monetary Incentives ✓ site some subsidies medium As much as a 1% Employee or Alternative Work Schedules Low ✓ regional VMT reduction management reluctance Who Pays Evaluation Criteria for Transportation Demand Range of Effectiveness Implementation Cost Ln Q) i � = a Management (TDM) Difficulties a o Strategies i L, E w 0.1-2.0% regional VMT Commute Support Programs None Low ✓ reduction Liability concerns of Guaranteed Ride Home Unknown Low ✓ ✓ employers Low to Parking Management 20-30% reduction in Employee opposition revenue ✓ ✓ SOV trips producing Low to Space; local zoning Facility Amenities Minimal alone revenue ✓ requirements producing Transportation Management 6-7% commute trip Funding and political Low- ✓ ✓ Associations reduction* support required medium TRANSPORTATION: PRICING STRATEGIES Public and political Up to 5% regional VMT resistance; travel Revenue Congestion Pricing alternatives required; ✓ reduction technical and enforcement Producing difficulties Legislative action; 1-5% regional VMT and negative public Revenue Parking Tax ✓ ✓ trip reduction sentiment; opposition producing from private sector TELECOMMUNICATIONS STRATEGIES Up to 10% commute Prevailing corporate Telecommuting Low ✓ VMT reduction culture LAND USE STRATEGIES Development Impact Varies with mitigation Landowner and Low to ✓ ✓ Mitigation requirements developer resistance medium * Costs required of the City for implementation of the strategies to City owned buildings and facilities **These are listed as Best Management Practices (BMP*) since there is not adequate literature at this time to generalize the mitigation measure reductions ***These ranges are approximate and should not be used in lieu of the specific quantification method provided in the fact sheet for each measure. Who Pays Evaluation Criteria for Transportation Demand Range of Effectiveness Implementation Cost Ln Q) i � = a Management (TDM) Difficulties a o Strategies i L, E w Mixed Land Use/Jobs VMT reductions up to Public resistance; slow Low to ✓ ✓ ✓ Housing Balance 10% rate of effective change medium Transit -Oriented and Increase in transit, bike, Requires design review; Medium to ✓ ✓ Pedestrian Friendly Design and pedestrian trips developer resistance high VMT reductions of up to Public and developer Medium to Residential Density Increases resistance to required ✓ ✓ 10% per household densities high Large increase in densityMedium Employment Center Density SOV work trip often required to realize to ✓ ✓ Increases reductions of up to 50% high significant change Local council action Parking Management 1 to 5% region -wide required; public/retailer Low ✓ ✓ VMT reduction resistance; enforcement issues Unknown; probably Requires policy changes, On -Site Amenities reflects effectiveness of public, and private Low to ✓ ✓ ✓ medium mixed use development inertia are barriers POLICY & REGULATORY STRATEGIES Legislative action Trip Reduction Ordinances .1 - 4% regional VMT required; resistance to Low- ✓ ✓ ✓ reduction medium expanded regulation Restrict Vehicle Access to Political will to face 2.8-10% VMT reduction Low to high ✓ Facilities and Activity Centers public opposition Parking Maximizing 1-5% trip reduction Public, developer Low ✓ resistance * Costs required of the City for implementation of the strategies to City owned buildings and facilities **These are listed as Best Management Practices (BMP*) since there is not adequate literature at this time to generalize the mitigation measure reductions ***These ranges are approximate and should not be used in lieu of the specific quantification method provided in the fact sheet for each measure. Table 2. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strateqies Who Pays Evaluation Criteria for Implementation Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Range of Effectiveness Cost Reduction Strategies Difficulties o Q .� E ENERGY (X is equal to the Exceed Washington Developer resistance to Building Envelope Energy percentage more stringent building Medium - ✓ ✓ ✓ improvement selected high Efficiency Standards by X% codes for the project Install Energy Efficient Up to 20% reduction Medium- ✓ ✓ ✓ Appliances high Install Programmable Thermostat Timers BMP* Minimal Low Establish Onsite Renewable 0-100% reduction High cost High ✓ ✓ ✓ Energy Systems Install Higher Efficacy Public Street and Area 16-40% reduction Low- ✓ ✓ Medium Lighting Limit Outdoor Lighting BMP* Safety concerns Low ✓ Requirements Replace Traffic Lights with 90% reduction Low ✓ LED Traffic Lights WASTE Institute or Extend Funding and public Low - Recycling and Composting BMP* ✓ ✓ support required Medium Services Recycle Demolished BMP* Low ✓ ✓ ✓ Construction Material Who Pays Evaluation Criteria for Implementation Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Range of Effectiveness Cost 5, Reduction Strategies Difficulties o 0- E WATER Technical feasibility, cost Medium- Use Reclaimed Water 0-40% reduction and public policy ✓ High acceptance Financial support and Medium - Use Gray Water 0-100% reduction ✓ public education needed High Install Low -Flow Water 17-31% reduction Minimal Low ✓ ✓ ✓ Fixtures. Adopt a Water Varies Minimal Low ✓ ✓ Conservation Strategy. Design Water -Efficient 0-70% reduction Minimal Low ✓ ✓ ✓ Landscapes GENERAL PLAN STRATEGIES Fund Incentives for Energy Funding and political Low- BMP* ✓ ✓ Efficiency support required Medium Establish a Local Farmer's BMP* Minimal Low ✓ Market Establish Community BMP* Minimal Low ✓ Gardens Plant Urban Shade Trees* BMP Minimal Low- ✓ ✓ Medium Implement Strategies to Reduce Urban Heat -Island BMP* Low ✓ ✓ Effect MISCELLANEOUS * Costs required of the City for implementation of the strategies to City owned buildings and facilities **These are listed as Best Management Practices (BMP*) since there is not adequate literature at this time to generalize the mitigation measure reductions ***These ranges are approximate and should not be used in lieu of the specific quantification method provided in the fact sheet for each measure. Who Pays Evaluation Criteria for Implementation Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Range of Effectiveness Cost 5, Reduction Strategies Difficulties o Q C � � w Establish a Carbon Funding and public Varies Low ✓ ✓ Sequestration Project support required Establish Off -Site Funding and public Varies Low ✓ ✓ Mitigation support required Developer resistance to Use Local and Sustainable Low- more stringent building ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ BuildingBMP* Materials Medium codes Developer resistance to Require Environmentally BMP* more stringent building Low ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Responsible Purchasing codes Implement an Innovative Funding and public Strategy for GHG BMP* Low ✓ ✓ support required Mitigation * Costs required of the City for implementation of the strategies to City owned buildings and facilities **These are listed as Best Management Practices (BMP*) since there is not adequate literature at this time to generalize the mitigation measure reductions ***These ranges are approximate and should not be used in lieu of the specific quantification method provided in the fact sheet for each measure. Definitions • Bioretention BMP: Engineered facilities that store and treat stormwater by passing it through a specified soil profile, and either retain or detain the treated stormwater for flow attenuation. Refer to Chapter 7 of Volume V of the Department of Ecology's SWMMWW (2014) for Bioretention BMP types and design specifications. • Low Impact Development (LID): A stormwater and land use management strategy that strives to mimic pre -disturbance hydrologic processes of infiltration, filtration, storage, evaporation and transpiration by emphasizing conservation, use of on-site natural features, site planning, and distributed stormwater management practices that are integrated into a project design. • Permeable Pavement: Pervious concrete, porous asphalt, permeable pavers or other forms of pervious or porous paving material intended to allow passage of water through the pavement section. It often includes an aggregate base that provides structural support and acts as a stormwater reservoir. • Rain garden: A non -engineered shallow, landscaped depression, with compost -amended native soils and adapted plants. The depression is designed to pond and temporarily store stormwater runoff from adjacent areas, and to allow stormwater to pass through the amended soil profile. / Critical charge Area Aquifer Recharge q 777 1% LVAN ED t •� •. di.. Z IY /Jv ti iY fI WHIM '♦yam U.� �� �.J I� � t r aril r • � a ♦ C.I LIJI2WI .. [a - F. Y`:C ...•—• vvi � t\ i q N 6111 c I DI Yr � ♦� � cW L FFKE� s ♦ •7 HE •--•-' Legend Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (Category 1) trr Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (Category 11) .f City Limits Vl :V Kitsap County 0 .5 1 2,Mile data � t and m y n ed or elied -spec i �>' ations, o a sine for ai du�p Surface Geology / F J, 4vl (� r I •" NII[iNVAN WY u' S jjjr,�� ^ ;��.j •v= � � �� �� �� �j�✓ 1(r �'��re ^i lrr �'�,, hvv a so i y f 2Y I � " I ft �W, / r al yv;t�� rYrr h�Iw���`IrI /JJ lttlC yririJa tS / �l' /y 1 ✓/� , w ,r M1F w r��/l �� i �.�.._� VV1 r�tieuit ✓ ; 7/� / , r ✓t 'r4 vFe� � iter yi " d✓, 3 M y� puar� /i W� Nzw a pal t r �l I L r.r i MEN -V VIF Ai: tt" r��r r✓ r/;"/ FaI ca f / • , / w rkaN� n i i HID �� r L k I V 117( ri f 01ra — ------.--.1 GW �� FSI tI-i �N 0 �� � 1 2 Miles / Lacustrine Peat W WI Ir Till woo I:r ISI r '� Undifferentiated /101 r>> Unknown Type r — _— I City Limits ♦ } N ■ Shorelines of Statewide Significance .x- rL --•--, ISI ,1 HII:r Ar ` �4, ►t ■ +i ■ __' I I :� IM •f- i.—..t' l ,'i'.1i ♦ '� c ? .all.unuvGMAN vnv II } l WAY y I• fl ( i■ d ■� a� ♦ Rion , ao Ln I ♦+ m ti a �, I : r—..� � � •! .+I�"�`�"C�Y��J`!'�� tt,Il r '... r CSI 77X1>�� 1 , t• ! ' r ! �.. .� • � � I �.,�::. v � cis i pa t , ; Li A ♦ r' tl xi ';41 ♦ `< ff� W� e.1 R �c5�" ♦ ° cY Inl. Illy r--•--' WI I �,��� I LrLLII yr P r, mi MOIWIS ' ' 7 ♦ : `••— x f Gf6L V'CI afII�f,V 1,17 R „W HI.�RRV I Y `�I ... L fUQ Ir[C r .,.. a rf • � �` � � �,W C71C CMC TCI)pdCS'1 _, �� rr, ♦ ..r L.�,r� I LA s♦2'� I � � u sI .T rL[,wlc;x I,IL so If YrJ C W I IDV R fir) 7";? CI . ' I a I c', � rrn .� sv% AK< I Lrrrn 1.13 rlur Rr•'•SL x Itl} � � c' Y, n, Legend V$' Id GW W II I W1,0015 It1 7 ■ Shoreline of Statewide Significance --•--•! LF^VFFiC[W LAKI WAY .- f41 WAY City Limits RVR I v Kitsap County 0 0.5 1 �F�:r�`I".IFL " Miles �, ... Bremerton Comprehensive Planning PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM 1. PURPOSE AND MISSION: Public participation is an essential part of the City of Bremerton's planning process. This public participation program provides the framework for public input on the review, amendment, and ultimate update of the city's comprehensive plan. In designing this public participation program, the City of Bremerton attempts to involve the broadest cross-section of the community, particularly encouraging both groups and individuals not previously involved in planning. Early, continuous, effective public participation will result in a comprehensive plan that assures the community's desired future, while meeting the mandates of the Washington State's Growth Management Act. 2. REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACT The Growth Management Act requires that the City of Bremerton establish procedures providing for early and continuous public participation in the development and amendment of comprehensive land use plans and development regulations. The procedures described below for the City of Bremerton Update Process will achieve the following: 1. Early and continuous participation From the onset of the process, including the creation of the participation program, the Planning Commission and city staff will ensure expansive and effective public involvement by using methods that include surveys, information bulletins, and distribution lists for all interested parties to receive regular notices, meeting advertisements, and updates. The public will be well advised of the opportunities for involvement and particularly encouraged to participate in the drafting and review of the proposed updates to the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Communication and information programs City staff will use all available means to encourage participation at all levels, through outreach and educational efforts, including television appearances that will be available throughout the proposal (web -video), presence at public events, and a website that will be continually updated with project documents and announcements. Keeping the public informed through a variety of mediums is a key aspect of this program, and the website will be used as a top source of information. Web publications will be posted and updated regularly. These are designed to describe the Comprehensive Plan and the update process, outline opportunities for public involvement, and provide contact information, including the web site, email, and facsimile address for public inquiry and comment. Detailed information and progress reports will be available for local organizations and media outlets, such as local newsletters, news articles, and Bremerton-Kitsap Access Television (BKAT) regular appearances. 3. Public meetings with adequate notice All public meetings concerning the Comprehensive Plan will be advertised throughout the community. Formal public notices will be posted and published in consistent locations including the Department of Community Development, and "The Sun" (local daily newspaper). Interested parties will be further notified through an electronic notice distribution list, providing process updates and meeting details. 4. Provisions for open discussion Open discussion will result from a fair and open process, with various opportunities for public input. Public workshops will be advertised and made accessible to the broadest audience possible. Public notification of the meetings will be distributed in advance of the workshops. Discussion will be ensured and encouraged by designated time for facilitated discussion, public hearings prior to adoption of amendments, and well -noticed public comment periods. 5. Opportunity for written comments Written comments will be accepted and encouraged at all venues and in various forms, including email messages and facsimiles. Notice of public comments periods will encourage written comments and provide contact information, especially on draft comprehensive plan updates. Comments should be addressed to the City of Bremerton Planning Commission at: (Mail Address) Department of Community Development, 345 61' Street Suite 600, Bremerton, Washington 98337; or (E-mail Address) complan(c�ci.bremerton.wa.us. For specific questions Long Range Planner, Allison Satter will be available throughout this process at (360) 473-5845. Planning staff will provide public comment cards at Commission meetings and at strategic locations throughout the city. The comment cards will be regularly collected but also designed for easy postcard mailing. In addition to this, assorted City of Bremerton swag will be handed out to those who are involved in the commenting process. Written comments will be presented to the Planning Commission during official public meetings. 6. Consideration and "fair response" to public comments All comments on draft proposals and alternatives will be accepted and brought to the attention of the Planning Commission for their consideration. Written comments will also be kept on file for public review. City Planning Staff will acknowledge the receipt of written comments by sending a letter with notification of opportunities for further involvement. 7. Broad dissemination of proposals and alternatives Draft proposals and alternatives will be broadly disseminated throughout the community. A bulletin -type publication, posted at various locations to provide general information about the process, will direct the public to the city-wide locations for reviewing the draft materials. Locations for the review of draft proposals and alternatives include: 1. Department of Community Development, 345 6t' Street, Suite 600 Bremerton 2. Downtown Library, 612 5t' Street, Bremerton 3. Bremerton Area Chamber of Commerce, 286 4t' Street, Bremerton 4. Kitsap Regional Library — Sylvan Way Branch. 1301 Sylvan Way, Bremerton 5. Sheridan Community Center, 680 Lebo Blvd., Bremerton 6. Olympic College Library, 1600 Chester Avenue, Bremerton 7. School District Office, 134 Marion Avenue, Bremerton 3. PROGRAM POLICIES AND PROCEDURES: Throughout the Comprehensive Plan update process, the City of Bremerton will maximize citizen involvement opportunities. This participation program specifically details the comprehensive update process, striving for city-wide participation as opposed to a process which tends to focus on isolated issues or properties. Efforts will continue to make the process open and accessible to all concerned parties and to make related materials and presentations easily understood by the citizens of Bremerton. STAGES of the COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE PROCESS: 1. Scoping Stage: Review of the Comprehensive Vision and Goals Public participation efforts begin with accepting public comment on the Work Program established through the District Profiling exercise and review for consistency with State law and regulations. The existing Comprehensive Plan's vision, goals, policies, and implementation strategies are the starting point for the update. Fine-tuning of the Comprehensive Plan, compliance with Kitsap County- wide planning policies, Puget Sound Regional Center Vision 2040 and Washington State mandates will be raised for discussion. 2. Adopting Stage: Proposed Updates for a Comprehensive Revision The Comprehensive Plan Update will be conducted through public, noticed hearings at which community members and interested parties will be encouraged to participate. Planning Commission and City Council will conduct workshops to deliberate the code as a whole, in addition to separating key policies into their own workshops (such as separate meetings for Housing, Land Use, Economic Development, Parks & Recreation, and Capital Facilities & Utilities). All those workshops will provide time for public comment, approximately 24+ meetings. Public Hearings will be held at both the Planning Commission and City Council levels, complete with notices and written comment periods. At hearings, all persons desiring to speak should be allowed to do so, consistent with time constraints. ROLES in the COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE PROCESS: As outlined above, the Planning Commission chairs the update process for the Comprehensive Plan. Following the City Council's final adoption of comprehensive plan updates and supplemental development regulations, the Commission will monitor implementation and compliance. The Commission will hold public meetings to provide information on how implementation is progressing and to receive public input on changes that may be needed. When amendments are proposed for adoption, the same public hearing procedure should be followed as attended in the Update adoption process. Public participation and comprehensive planning are iterative and continuous. Planning staff will provide frequent progress reports on the update to the Planning Commission and the City Council, including verbal reports during regularly televised Council meetings. Members of the Planning, Engineering, Parks and Recreation, Utilities, and other City Departments will provide technical assistance throughout the process, including requests for neighborhood meetings, sub -committee work, and other opportunities. The City will support and participate in public education/involvement offered by Puget Sound Regional Council, Kitsap County, Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council, surrounding jurisdictions, special districts, and other area organizations. [Statutory Authority: RCW 36.70A. -020(11), -.140,-.035,-.070,-.130(2),-.390] The following are functional plans of the Comprehensive Plan: Document ksoluthon/Ordinance, Date Water System Plan Ord. 5220 6/19/2013 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Ord. 5268 12/17/2014 Stormwater Management Plan Update Ord. 5094 11/4/2009 Non -Motorized Transportation Plan Ord. 5037 12/19/2007 Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Plan Ord. 5242 3/19/2014 Bay Vista Subarea Plan Ord. 5202 12/19/2012 PSIC-Bremerton Subarea Plan (formerly South Kitsap Industrial Center) Ord. 5188 8/1/2012 Eastpark Subarea Plan Ord. 4962 1/28/2006 Downtown Regional Center Subarea Plan Ord. 5034; Ord. 5202 12/19/2007; 12/19/2012 Gorst Subarea Plan Ord. 5237 12/18/2013 Shoreline Master Program Ord. 5229 12/4/2013 *As currently adopted or hereinafter amended Exhibit C 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update Ordinance The Bay Vista Subarea Plan can be seen: http://www.ci.bremerton.wa.us/370/Bay-Vista or at the City of Bremerton website: www.ci.bremerton.wa.us (Home -Our Government -Community Development -Bay Vista). The following are proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan of the Bay Vista Subarea Plan. Title or Figure Page for Proposed Revisions (IV) Zoning & A. Land Use Zones; Development fourth and fifth Standards: paragraphs page 21 Proposed ovsos to Comprehensive Plan Portion Revised text in the manner: P!aRRed d,,.,elep.. eRt. 1111he a_s « IIM1ast_2_ If�De 11 Irma lr : - -_ _______n q[! rl!el'ieirismly: IfPla-irDm These proposals must meet a public need... PFE)PE)Sa'S iR +ti„ nan m required to prepare a Master Development Plan (MDP), which includes..." Other Information Master Development zone is removed from the Comprehensive Plan Update, as there are no remaining sites appropriate for a Master Development Plan. However, the Bay Vista is still compliant with the 2016 Comprehensive Plan update. Exhibit D 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update Ordinance The Downtown Subarea Plan can be seen: http://www.ci.bremerton.wa.us/371/Downtown or at the City of Bremerton website: www.ci.bremerton.wa.us: Home -Our Government -Community Development -Downtown. The following are proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan portions of the Downtown Subarea Plan. Title or Figure Proposed Revisions to Page for Proposede Comprehensive Plan Revisions Portion Introduction: page 1-5 Introduction: page 1-5 1.0 Introduction, Purpose and Need; second paragraph Downtown Subarea Study Area Boundaries Map Revise second paragraph to reference 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update: "The Sub Area Plan supports and implements the policies presented in the 2004 M;lLt u 1 .�D a City of Bremerton Comprehensive Plan..." Revise map to provide additional area that was identified in the Comprehensive Plan Update. Other Information Updated to be current with Comprehensive Plan Update. This includes the area west of Warren Avenue between Burwell and 6t" Streets. Replacement page has been included as Exhibit 1. T, Id a TV .. ........ @ . COL -Ile ,E ........... E F'. 0 CL ai ai C ra ai qj m 0- ai Z 7=, CL n br4, 7D > a. 0 n r_ CL Qj o E- eq Qj E uj CC E ai < 0 0 E 0 ton ;05 3� o E 1-0-"d Li r - I CL -v m 7D -v Exhibit E 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update Ordinance I IF 11,110111111111111111111; 1,, The South Kitsap Industrial Area Subarea Plan can be seen: http://www.ci.bremerton.wa.us/398/SKIA- PSIC or at the City of Bremerton website: www.ci.bremerton.wa.us: Home -Our Government -Community Develop ment-SKIA/PSIC. The South Kitsap Industrial Area was adopted in August 2012 as Ordinance 5188. The following are proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations of the South Kitsap Industrial Center Subarea Plan. Title or Figure Page for Proposed Revisions Within the Document Overview but will affect the complete Subarea Plan Document Overview Proposed ovsos to Comprehensive a Portionor Information Proposing addition to the Document Due to the recent Overview section: rebranding, this 5ince dhe adopboin of dh1� s a mub'LeaD.lIain,, subarea plan and tills a ilea "ia s i�eeiri IYe- biY"a ICi(Ae(a s ties all references will --- L)!,_i__'_ I I_ du.al�m�;ir'u«�Il,����ir�tei� be known as the IIY ¢ - 4. u� C�G� ( C rr ei- i�oir Ifs"SII IP "" Ire IY iY Ir�� m i;�: PugetSound Ilia�m Il irau�mlr'iIl,ir „ ,�mllllll_�_�_�_ Industrial Center - Bremerton Subarea Plan. lindu.al"atlY" al CeIC t DIY"'°-BmI"1C11eIY"' oin " AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Account #342133 AD#1100384 STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KITSAP I, Teresa Hull, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: That she is now, and at all times embraced in the publication herein mentioned was the principal clerk of the printers and publishers of KITSAP SUN; that said newspaper has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the County of Kitsap, in which County it is published and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of the publi- cation hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Bremerton, Kitsap County, Washington, a weekly newspaper in Kitsap County, Washington and is now and during all of said time, was printed in an office maintained in the aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper; that the following is a true text of an advertisement as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplement form) of said newspaper on the following date, to wit: And on May 24, 2016 such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. The full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $56.81. This amount has not been paid in full. (Signature of Principal Clerk) Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of May 26, 2016. 1�- Notary Public State of Washington TISHA SULLIVAN My Appointment Expires Aug 4, 2018 ORDINANCE NO. 5299 AN ORDINANCE -of the City Council of the City of Bremer- ton, Washington, adopt- ing the City of Bremerton 2016 Comprehensive Plan, amending affiliated subar- ea plans and repealing ordi- nances relating to the 2004 Comprehensive Plan and the Manette Subarea Plan. PASSED by the City Council on the 18th day of May, 2016. The full text of this ordinance is available from the City Clerk's Office, 345 Sixth Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337. MAY 24, 2016 AD# 1100384