Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/05/2017 AGENDA PACKETCITY COUNCIL 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337 - Phone (360) 473-5280 JULY 5, 2017 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 1. BRIEFING: 5:00 — 5:30 P.M. in COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM 603 A. Review of Agenda B. General Council Business (As necessary...) 2. CALL TO ORDER: 5:30 P.M. in FIRST FLOOR CHAMBERS A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Invocation 3. MAYOR'S REPORT 4. FIRE DEPARTMENT BRIEFING — Fire Chief David Schmitt 5. POLICE DEPARTMENT BRIEFING — Police Chief Steve Strachan 6. PUBLIC RECOGNITION 7. CONSENT AGENDA A. Claims & Check Register B. Minutes of Meeting — June 21, 2017 C. Minutes of Study Session — June 28, 2017 D. Authorize hiring David Johnson, Building Official at Pay Band 15, Rate 6 of the 2017 Management, Professional, Confidential & Fiduciary Salary Plan E. Ordinance No. 5327 to repeal and replace Ordinance No. 5300 regarding the 2016 Shoreline Limited Amendments to the Shoreline Master Program F. Mutual Aid Agreement for the Provision of Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services G. Professional Services Agreement with the Bremerton School District for a full-time School Resource Officer H. Purchase of a John Deere 450 KLT Crawler Dozer from Pape Machinery, Inc. of Tacoma, WA for the Forestry Division I. Agreement with Golden Eagle Evergreens for the Removal and Sale of Minor Forest Products J. Commercial Line Extension Agreement with Puget Sound Energy for Pump Station KL -2 8. GENERAL BUSINESS A. Professional Services Agreement with BMcConsulting LLC for Lobbying Services B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties 9. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 10. ADJOURNMENT OF CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING ® Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodations provided upon request. Those requiring special accommodations please contact the City Clerk at (360) 473-5323 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. _T _T C L � Q � Z Q d � # L � a 3 � w U W c- o� -ro C d Q One o � G rryir UL 0 3 rYi L i m (b a) Ep Cc N G A" O 6 JE +L+ N c a o E ro o a) a) a fA O U fn ID G $ t -e E U N c0 �} U U) 0, r - cz O E O E O v v 4)z U m � o2� ro m m -o a N m ++ E Q N a) c c o_ QO O �},aNG-O Q >, CU 0>12 mai �����•� ro j � CL 0 s cd O m 3 Q �ozm�a) »a)oNU a0 flti j LL CL O U ELL— -o oY'� z Ep 8 g d a v v vCU ax v� o4 Q a r L, C� ti O 4 C � �t m z 0 r-1 rd rx., 0 0 'b w cn �,T f/7 z W C/J d Z C= a" 0 N \ cr U3 > Cn ` coW r Zy H Z s VII F-�Ialz w � W J a Qr CL N Z EV� ■ V O O m In N Z a O z O � p= W W m W LLI 9 m m Z 3 O Z O o , 00 n W /W V Z H LU m LLJ H W x O co I.— C:) 0 coJ W x Q N 00 k wag PEEN Go wo w ■FEE" � V" 2 � § � ) � § : o v CL \ \ 2 ` } L § R tA 0 E0 . _\\ 2 L3 - =z= 7 - N \ / J L 0 g7 s] 8d mV] k U Z kA� LU CL _» O ■ }$ U a� p.. /\ soft U ©■m � . �2 {/� j) ■c§®g � a$!a § \ CL. 0 O]N| § ,� k ^ S k 2Ln 21 Ln J/22 / 2\ ) 0 / &7°t � it LA J m m 2 A 7 L PEEN,, �4¥gL aee_LL \�z cc LU LU § j LLI k k wag PEEN Go wo w ■FEE" � V" 2 � § � ) � § : o v CL \ \ 2 ` } L § R tA 0 E0 . _\\ 2 L3 - =z= 7 - N \ / J L 0 g7 s] 8d mV] k U Z kA� LU CL _» O ■ }$ U a� p.. /\ soft U ©■m � . �2 {/� j) ■c§®g � a$!a § \ CL. 0 O]N| 1 O a. r O N ti O N M r M- Er - =3.a LO au U L Lo f0 0 2 V� L# W LaJ 0 0CL t a 0 V z 3 d N N Q N co co N LO M ti O co co O C6 E O E O U_ O C6 U C6 O Bremerton's Lillian A. & James Walker Park - Municipal Excellence Award Back Row (L to R): Council Member Richard Huddy, Council Member Dino Davis, Council Member Greg Wheeler, Council President Eric Younger, Council Vice President Jerry McDonald, Council Member Leslie Daugs, and Council Member Pat Sullivan. Front Row (L to R): Parks & Recreation Director Jeff Elevado, Cynthia Engelgau, Mayor Patty Lent, Holly Peterson, and Scott Evans Fire Department Promotions Back Row (L to R): Council Member Richard Huddy, Council Member Dino Davis, Council Member Greg Wheeler, Council President Eric Younger, Council Vice President Jerry McDonald, Council Member Leslie Daugs, and Council Member Pat Sullivan. Front Row (L to R): Fire Chief Dave Schmitt, Captain Brian Marceau, Lieutenant Brian Junkin, Mayor Patty Lent, Captain Dan Mustard, Lieutenant Craig Patti, Training Battalion Chief John Payne Police Chief Steven Strachan introducing Police Officer Chris Faidley and their new K9 Esco... BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKERS LIST REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CLERK THANK YOU SUBJECT: Claims & Check Register SUMMARY: AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 7A Study Session Date: N/A COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 5, 2017 Department: Financial Services Presenter: Shannon Corin Phone: 473-5323 Approval of the following checks and electronic fund transfers: 1) Check #'s 374198 through 374387 and EFT's 17468 through 17509 in the amount of $2,844,617.11. 2) Regular Payroll for the pay period ending June 15, 2017 in the amount of $7,390.09. 3) Retiree Payroll for the pay period ending June 30, 2017 in the amount of $49,379.04. ATTACHMENTS: FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): STUDY SESSION AGENDA: x❑ No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: 0 Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the consent agenda as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action SUBJECT: Minutes of Meeting — June 21, 2017 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL m Study Session Date: N/A COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 5, 2017 Department: City Council Presenter: Council President Phone: (360)473-5280 SUMMARY: Attached is the summary of the City Council Meeting on June 21, 2017. ATTACHMENTS: Meeting Minutes FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): N/A STUDY SESSION AGENDA: o No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: o Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny Form Updated 12/15/15 ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action DIGITAL RECORDING CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, June 21, 2017 The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order Wednesday, June 21, 2017, at 5:00 PM in Council Conference Room 603 of the NORM DICKS GOVERNMENT CENTER, 345 6th Street, Bremerton, Washington, with Acting Council President Dino Davis presiding. Council Members present were Greg Wheeler, Leslie Daugs, and Pat Sullivan. Council President Eric Younger, Council Vice President Jerry McDonald, and Council Member Richard Huddy were absent due to their attendance at the Annual Association of Washington Cities (AWC) Conference in Vancouver, WA. Also present were City Attorney Roger Lubovich; City Clerk Shannon Corin; Legislative Assistant Lori Smith; and Dave Sorenson, Information Services. A COUNCIL BRIEFING was held to discuss General Council Business at 5:00 PM in the Council Conference Room. At 5:30 PM the meeting moved to the Meeting Chambers. Acting President Davis welcomed the Bremerton High School's "Naval Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps" (NJROTC) Honor Guard to present the flag. The Pledge of Allegiance was then led by Council Member Pat Sullivan followed by the invocation provided by Pastor Clint Collins of First Christian Church. MAYOR'S REPORT — Mayor Lent... • Proclaimed Saturday, July 1, 2017 as "Honor Guards Day", and presented the proclamation to SNSI: Lt. David Malnar, USN, Ret; • Invited the public to the "Chimacum Community Celebration" on Thursday, June 22 from 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM, with a Ceremony at 1:30 PM at the Bremerton Ferry Terminal; • Encouraged participation in the 24th Annual United Way Day of Caring on Friday, June 23; • Mentioned a Candlelight Vigil in honor and remembrance of the USS Fitzgerald Sailors on Friday, June 23 at 8:00 PM on the Louis Mentor Boardwalk next to the USS Turner Joy; • Proclaimed Saturday, June 24, 2017 as "National Inclusive Play Day', and encouraged the community to participate in the "So All May Play Date" on Saturday, June 24 from 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM at Evergreen Rotary Park; • Solicited volunteers for the 2017 Summer "Point -In -Time" Count on July 13; • Hoped a host family (with no cats or dogs) can soon be found for a Kure, Japan Exchange Student visiting Bremerton in August; and • Brought forward Patti Peterson of the Kitsap County Food Bank Coalition to present Certificates of Appreciation to USPS Letter Carriers who assisted in the Annual Food Drive. 1120 L ir-G -DFPARTR4FhiT -R RIGrihiG Postponed until July 5... PUBLIC RECOGNITION Rick L. Bonari Brain Injury Alliance of Wash ington-Kitsap County (BIWA) announced the 2017 "Walk, Run, & Roll for Thought — Because Minds Matte" event on Saturday, 9 at Lions Park, encouraging entrants to sign up early and for sponsors to participate; and Diana Bluthenthal read an essay written by Kelley Bluthenthal entitled "Brain Injury: No Hidden Advantage". Jennifer Chamberlin expressed concern about an incident where she said police officers entered her home by mistake when her address was incorrectly provided by a 911 dispatch officer; and said she then only learned it happened when a neighbor told her about it. Therefore she asked the City to adopt a "policy" that would notify homeowners directly when something like this happens. City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes June 21, 2017 Page 2of5 Gavle Gillespie was disappointed that Chief Strachan was not in attendance because he hoped to ask him to please pass on his thanks to Police Officer Sara Lefty for her efforts in locating his car that was stolen a few weeks ago. Additionally, he asked the City to consider using solar panels on the roof of the Norm Dicks Government Center to save energy costs. Carl Palmer participated in discussions earlier today with Harrison Medical Center employees regarding significant staffing changes being proposed; and had a separate discussion with the CEO of CHI Franciscan Health where he was "shocked" to learn of his "blatant disregard for the community", expressing no interest in having the City of Bremerton Mayor, Council Members, or employee union representatives present during future talks. CONSENT AGENDA 6A — Claims & Check Register: Check Numbers 373945 through 374197, and EFT- 17419 through EFT -17467 in the amount of $2,157,405.86; Regular Payroll (Payout & Correction) for the pay period ending May 31, 2017 in the amount of $176.40; and Regular Payroll for the pay period ending June 15, 2017 in the amount of $789,452.80 6B— Minutes of Meeting — June 7, 2017 6C — Minutes of Study Session — June 14, 2017 6D— Confirm Reappointment of Bill Benson to the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Project Review Committee 6E— Confirm Reappointment of Jordy Andrew to the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Project Review Committee 6F — Confirm Appointment of Fanny Burdette to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee 6G — Professional Services Agreement with Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. to perform a Compensation Study of Management & Professional, and Teamsters positions 6H — Ordinance No. 5324 to amend and re-establish Assessments, Rates, Fees, and Charges; and re-establish the General Facilities Charges into Exhibit A 61— Ordinance No. 5325 to amend Chapter 9.92 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) entitled "Chronic Nuisance Properties" 6J — Resolution No. 3289 to establish a Community Development Block Grant/HOME Housing Rehabilitation/Down Payment Assistance Loan Program Portfolio Management Guide 6K— SeFVOGes Agree.m.ept�Artil Qnn�rnc^rw^r�rStlltiRg-LL-S f49F LE)bbyiRg Selvr^cc6 Postponed until July 5... 06:11:52 M/S/C/U (Sullivan/Daugs) Move to approve the CONSENT AGENDA as presented. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7A — PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 3290 TO ADOPT THE 2018-2023 SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN: Chal Martin, Public Works & Utilities Director stated that the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is prepared pursuant to RCW 35.77.010. The TIP is updated annually and filed with the Secretary of Transportation, Local Programs Office. It is intended as a planning tool for the local, State and Federal transportation funding entities. The TIP has been prepared for City Council approval by Resolution prior to submittal to the Washington State Department of Transportation. This TIP is consistent with Bremerton's Comprehensive and Non -Motorized Transportation Plans, and Street CIP. City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes June 21, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Acting President Davis opened the public hearing With no comments received, Acting President Davis closed the Hearing to the public; and opened for discussion with the Council... 06:14:00 Motion was made by Daugs and seconded by Sullivan... Comments and questions were provided by Daugs; with responses provided by Mr. Martin... 06:14:45 M/S/C/U (Daugs/Sullivan) Move to adopt Resolution No. 3290, which approves the City's 2018 — 2023 Six -Year Transportation Improvement Plan; and allow the Mayor to forward the Resolution and Plan to the Department of Transportation, Local Programs Office. 7B — PUBLIC HEARING AND RESOLUTION NO. 3291 TO ADOPT THE 2018 CDBG/HOME POLICY PLAN; AND ANNOUNCE THE RELEASE OF THE REQUEST FOR FUNDING PROPOSALS FOR THE 2018 PROGRAM YEAR: Sarah Achaoui, CDBG Program Administrator, explained that the action before Council is adoption of the 2018 Policy Plan, which is a document that is updated yearly and sets parameters for the management of our HUD entitlement grant awards and provides specific information about the policies and regulations for the use of HUD CDBG and HOME funds. This plan was released on May 12 for public comment, and to date there have been no comments made. Staff will also be announcing that the Request for Funding Proposals for CDBG funds will be available on June 23 and due by noon on July 14. All potential applicants must attend a mandatory Technical Assistance session on June 28. Acting President Davis opened the public hearing... With no comments received, Acting President Davis closed the Hearing to the public; and opened for discussion with the Council... 06:23:30 Motion was made by Wheeler and seconded by Daugs... Comments were provided by Wheeler, Daugs, and Sullivan... 06:25:10 M/S/C/U (Wheeler/Daugs) Move to adopt Resolution No. 3291 to adopt the 2018 CDBG/HOME Policy Plan. 7C — PUBLIC HEARING AND ORDINANCE NO. 5326 TO AMEND TITLE 20 OF THE BREMERTON MUNICIPAL CODE (BMC) ENTITLED "LAND USE" REGARDING APPEALS, FENCES, RECREATIONAL VEHICLES ON A PRIVATE LOT, AUTOMOBILE SERVICE AND REPAIR: Kelli Lambert, City Planner explained that the action before Council is to conduct a Public Hearing and adopt an Ordinance amending BMC Title 20 as follows: 1. Appeals code. Add `Property Owner' as a party with standing to appeal a land use decision to be consistent with State Law. 2. Fence regulations. Remove the requirement that fences be constructed with `finished' face out because it is unenforceable. 3. Occupied Recreational Vehicles (RVs). Revise the regulations for occupying an RV on a private property by adding an RV Use permit to track usage. 4. Automobile Service & Repair: a. Allow Automobile Service and Repair as an outright permitted use in the General Commercial zone. City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes June 21, 2017 Page 4 of 5 b. Allow Automobile Service and Repair as a Conditional Use in the Neighborhood Business zone. c. Revise the definition to ensure that repair of vehicles not registered to a property owner or tenant on a residential property is prohibited. Allison Satter, City Planner, explained that Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU's) will be discussed under a separate ordinance at a Public Hearing scheduled on July 19. Acting President Davis opened the public hearing... Comments and questions were received by Jolanta Kellock, Diane Manning, and Lisa Tindall; with responses provided by Andrea Sullivan, Director of Community Development With no further comments received, Acting President Davis closed the Hearing to the public; and opened for discussion with the Council... 06:45:38 Motion was made by Wheeler and seconded by Sullivan... Comments and questions were provided by Wheeler, Sullivan, and Daugs; with responses provided by Ms. Lambert and Ms. Spencer.. . 06:52:45 M/S/C/U (Wheeler/Sullivan) Move to pass Ordinance No. 5326 to amend Bremerton Municipal Code Title 20 regarding: Appeals, Fence regulations, Occupied Recreational Vehicles on a Private Lot, and Automobile Service & Repair. GENERAL BUSINESS 8A — LOCAL AGENCY CONTRACT WITH MASSANA CONSTRUCTION, INC. OF GIG HARBOR, WA. FOR THE CROWNHILL ELEMENTARY SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PROJECT: Shane Weber, Managing Engineer, summarized that the City bid the project and opened the bids on June 9, 2017. Three (3) bids were received, with Massana Construction, Inc. the lowest responsive, responsible bidder with their bid of $456,101.00. The Washington State Department of Transportation is required to concur with the City's recommendation to award the contract; staff have recommended the bid for approval. The contract is in WSDOT standard format as required for Federal Aid Projects; the complete contract is available for review in the Engineering Office. The project constructs sidewalks, some drainage improvements, and a rapid flashing beacon in the vicinity of the school. There were no comments from the public... 06:58:20 Motion was made by Sullivan and seconded by Daugs... Comments were provided by Sullivan, Daugs, Wheeler, and Davis; and a question was asked by Wheeler, with a response provided by Mr. Weber... 07:00:55 M/S/C/U (Sullivan/Daugs) Move to award construction of the Crownhill Elementary Safe Routes to School Project to Massana Construction, Inc. upon receipt of concurrence to award from the Washington State Department of Transportation; and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. 8B — INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH MASON COUNTY FOR ROAD AND STREET CHIP SEAL MAINTENANCE SERVICES: Chal Martin, Public Works & Utilities Director, stated that this Interlocal Agreement provides a mechanism for Mason County to provide chip seal services on several East Bremerton street segments. The Agreement is for five years. This is a pilot program City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes June 21, 2017 Page 5 of 5 to explore means/methods to more efficiently maintain City streets. The initial projects under this Agreement are tentatively planned for the last week of July 2017. There were no comments from the public... 07:03:05 Motion was made by Daugs and seconded by Sullivan... Comments and questions were provided by Daugs, Wheeler, and Sullivan; with responses provided by Mr. Martin... 07:06:03 M/S/C/U (Daugs/Sullivan) Move to approve an Interlocal Agreement with Mason County for Chip Seal Maintenance Services; and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Greg Wheeler invited volunteers to join Friends of Kiwanis Park for the Monthly Clean-up on Saturday, June 24 to from 9:00 to 11:00 AM. Leslie Daugs announced today was the last day of schools in the Bremerton School District, therefore she cautioned drivers to be extra careful; and also displayed the schedule for the Summer Food Service Program for Children. Pat Sullivan enjoyed attending the Juneteenth Celebration at Evergreen Rotary Park last Saturday with several fellow Council Members; on behalf of Council Member Jerry McDonald, she encouraged attendance at the Bridge Blast off of the Manette Bridge on Saturday, July 1; and lastly, reminded pet owners that some calming medications require use at least one week ahead of time, so if fireworks cause their pets to have anxiety, please plan ahead. Dino Davis also cautioned drivers to be extra careful now that school has let out for the summer. With no further business, Acting President Davis adjourned the Council Meeting at 7:12 PM. Prepared and Submitted by: LORI SMITH Legislative Assistant APPROVED by the City Council on the 5th day of July, 2017. Eric Younger, Council President ATTEST: Shannon L. Corin, City Clerk EY:SC:ls:cg SUBJECT: Minutes of Study Session — June 28, 2017 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 7C Study Session Date COUNCIL MEETING Date Department Presenter Phone N/A July 5, 2017 City Council Council President (360) 473-5280 SUMMARY: Attached is the summary of the City Council Study Session on June 28, 2017. ATTACHMENTS: Meeting Minutes FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): N/A STUDY SESSION AGENDA: o No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: o Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny Form Updated 12/15/15 ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action DIGITAL RECORDING CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION MINUTES Wednesday, June 28, 2017 A Study Session of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the Council Conference Room of the NORM DICKS GOVERNMENT CENTER, 345 6t" Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, June 28, 2017, at 5:00 PM, with Council President Eric Younger presiding. Council Members present were Richard Huddy, Dino Davis, Greg Wheeler, Jerry McDonald, and Pat Sullivan. Council Member Leslie Daugs was absent. Lori Smith, Legislative Assistant, was present to provide staff support. President Younger emphasized that the Study Session was open to the public; and except for Item E1, there would be no opportunities for input or participation; and announced that approved items by Council will be placed on the July 5, 2017 Council Meeting Agenda or as indicated. A. INFORMATION BRIEFING 1. Annexation Efforts & Web Tool Demonstration — Allison Satter, Senior Planner and BERK Consulting Information only B. NO PRESENTATION PLANNED — The following items are budgeted items or subjects that have been raised with the appropriate Council Committee Members... 1. Authorize Hiring of David Johnson, Building Official at Pay Band 15, Rate 6 of the 2017 Management, Professional, Confidential & Fiduciary Salary Plan Consent Agenda 2. Ordinance to repeal and replace Ordinance No. 5300 regarding the 2016 Shoreline Limited Amendments to the Shoreline Master Program Consent Agenda 3. Mutual Aid Agreement for the Provision of Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services Consent Agenda 4. Professional Services Agreement with the Bremerton School District for a Full-time School Resource Officer Consent Agenda 5. Purchase of a John Deere 45OKLT Crawler Dozer from Pape Machinery, Inc. of Tacoma, WA for the Forestry Division Consent Agenda 6. Agreement with Golden Eagle Evergreens for the Removal and Sale of Minor Forest Products ConsentAgenda 7. Commercial Line Extension Agreement with Puget Sound Energy for Pump Station KL -2 Consent Agenda 8. Professional Services Agreement with BMcConsulting LLC for Lobbying Services General Business President Younger called a brief recess from 6:07 to 6:12 PM... C. FULL PRESENTATION PLANNED 1. Findings and Recommended Strategies of the Bremerton Parking Study — Shannon Corin, City Clerk and Jeff Arango, Project Manager, BERK Consulting (Now, Director of Planning at Framework Cultural Placemaking... ) President Younger called a brief recess from 8:08 to 8:15 PM... D. GENERAL COUNCIL BUSINESS o Finance & Investment Committee Briefing (06/15/17 Meeting) — Chair Richard Huddy City Council Study Session Minutes Wednesday, June 28, 2017 Page 2 of 2 o Audit Committee Briefing (06/19/17 Meeting) — Chair Pat Sullivan o Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Briefing (06/23/17 & 06/26/17 Meetings) — Chair Pat Sullivan o Other General Council Business was briefly discussed, including a proposed Ordinance by Council Member Huddy to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" to allow neighborhood Block Parties, which was approved for placement on the July 5 Council Meeting Agenda. E. EXECUTIVE SESSION 1. 30 -Minutes to discuss Pending Litigation items under RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) There were no comments from the public... 09:35:00 M/S/C/U (Wheeler/Davis) Move to approve Settlement Agreement between the City of Bremerton and Mark Thompson in the amount of $100,000 to resolve Workers Compensation Claim SG25486; and authorize the Mayor to sign documents necessary to complete the settlement. With no further business, President Younger adjourned the Council Study Session at 9:36 PM. Prepared and Submitted by: LORI SMITH, Legislative Assistant APPROVED by the City Council on the 5th day of July, 2017. Eric Younger, Council President ATTEST: Shannon L. Corin, City Clerk EY:SC:ls:cg AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Authorize hiring of David Johnson, Building Official at Pay Band 15, Rate 6 of the 2017 Management, Professional, Confidential & Fiduciary Salary Plan 7D Study Session Date: June 28, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Julv 5. 2017 Department: DCD Presenter: Andrea L. Spencer Phone: (360) 473.5283 SUMMARY: The Director of Community Development proposes to fill the soon to be vacant position of Building Official with David Johnson. Mr. Johnson has more than six years' experience as a Building Official and maintains 25 specialized building code certifications. In addition to being a Certified Building Code Official, he is also a "Master Code Professional" which is the highest level of certification offered by the International Code Council (ICC). This certification is the "gold standard" for demonstrating proficiency in the building code profession. The ICC has certified thousands of individuals in various aspects of building codes, but only a select number of individuals have attained this high-level of achievement of Master Code Professional. Mr. Johnson was selected after a lengthy recruitment process both by the City and Prothman (an executive recruitment company). The Director has negotiated salary compensation with Mr. Johnson and proposes making this appointment at Pay Band 15, Rate 6. Pursuant to the appointment provisions contained in BMC 2.50.032(a) this appointment above Rate 1 requires City Council authorization. ATTACHMENTS: Mr. Johnson's resume is on file with Human Resources. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): This position is fully funded. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: 0 No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑x Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize the hiring of David Johnson, Building Official, at Pay Band 15, Rate 6, of the 2017 City of Bremerton Management, Professional, Confidential & Fiduciary Salary Plan. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 5327 to repeal and replace Ordinance No. 5300 regarding the 2016 Shoreline Limited Amendments to the Shoreline Master Program. 7E Study Session Date: June 28, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Julv 5. 2017 Department: Presenter: Phone: DCD Allison Satter (360) 473-5845 SUMMARY: The attached ordinance will complete the City's proposed limited minor amendments to the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The City Council completed a minor update to the SMP in May 2016. The SMP was then forwarded to the Department of Ecology for their public review and approval. Ecology has recommended approval with two required and two recommended changes. The attached ordinance incorporates all recommended and required changes as can be seen in the attached Exhibits to the Ordinance. Ordinance No. 5300 was passed by Council in May 2016 and it was intended to be finalized after Ecology's review and approval. Due to the fact that Ecology required revisions this ordinance will repeal and replace Ordinance No. 5300. The new ordinance will include all of Council's adopted changes to the SMP and ecology's recommendations for the SMP limited amendments. With the adoption of this ordinance, the SMP minor update will finally be completed. ATTACHMENTS: • Proposed Ordinance No. 5327; and o Exhibit A: Findings and Conclusion of the Planning Commission o Exhibit B: Section 4.020 entitled "Maps" amendments o Exhibit C: Section 5.010 entitled "Applicability" amendments o Exhibit D: Section 7.010 entitled "Buffers and Setbacks" amendments o Exhibit E: Section 7.090 entitled "Use Matrix and Height Table" amendments o Exhibit F: Department of Ecology's Required Changes for Approval Attachment I: Ordinance No. 5300 adopted on May 18, 2016. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: 0 No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑x Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to pass Ordinance No. 5327 to adopt the limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action Form Updated 01/07/15 ORDINANCE NO. 5327 AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington repealing and replacing Ordinance 5300 with the adoption of this ordinance for the limited amendments to the City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program. WHEREAS, the people of the State of Washington enacted the Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) by a vote of the people in 1971; and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act of 1990 ("GMA") (RCW 36.70A.480) adds the goals and policies of the Shoreline Management Act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020 as one of the goals of the GMA without creating an order of priority; and WHEREAS, in 2003, The Department of Ecology adopted rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, which gave procedural and substantive direction to local jurisdictions for updating shoreline uses and regulations, which became effective January 17, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 5229 on December 4, 2013, adopting the Shoreline Master Program ("SMP") after approval of Department of Ecology, to be compliant with RCW 90.58.020 and WAC 173-26-186; and WHEREAS, the City updated the Comprehensive Plan through Ordinance No. 5299 on May 18, 2016; and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan update has made several land use map updates that required limited amendments to the SMP including text and mapping amendments to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070; 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, on March 17, 2016, amendments to the SMP were circulated to the State Agencies for the requisite 60 -day review and comment period; and WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton Planning Commission considered staff's recommendations, received testimony, and formulated a recommendation for SMP limited update to the City Council for consideration at a duly advertised public hearing on April 19, 2016; 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 on May 18, 2017; and, 2016 SMP Amendments WHEREAS, on May 18, 2017, City Council passed the Ordinance No. 5300 accepting the SMP limited amendments provided the City receives approval from the Department of Ecology; and WHEREAS, the Department of Ecology processed the City's proposed SMP limited amendments through a public process, received public comments, and provided the City two required changes and two recommended changes prior to approval of the limited amendments; and WHEREAS, this ordinance adopts the Department of Ecology's recommended and required amendments as well as the City's amendments set forth in Ordinance 5300, therefore Ordinance No. 5300 shall be repealed and replaced in its entirety; and WHEREAS, on June 23, 2017, 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; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION]. Ordinance Repeal and Replace. Ordinance No. 5300 is hereby repealed and replaced in its entirety. SECTION 2. Findings and Recitals Incorporated. The findings and recitals set forth above are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3. Planning Commission Findinss Adopted. 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 4. Chapter 4 - Shoreline Maps and Designations Amended. Chapter 4 of the SMP as adopted by Ordinance No. 5229 is hereby amended by amending Section 4.020 entitled "Maps" as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 5. Chapter 5 - Permit Administration Amended. Chapter 5 of the SMP as adopted by Ordinance No. 5229 is hereby amended by amending Section 5.010 entitled "Applicability" as set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 6. Chapter 7 -General Standards and Regulations Amended. Chapter 7 of the SMP as adopted by Ordinance No. 5229 is hereby amended by amending Section 7.010 entitled `Buffers and Setbacks" as set forth in Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 7. Chapter 7 -General Standards and Regulations Amended. Chapter 7 of the SMP as adopted by Ordinance No. 5229 is hereby amended by amending 2 2016 SMP Amendments Section 7.090 entitled "Use Matrix and Height Table" as set forth in Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION & Department ofEcology Required Process for Adoption. The City has coordinated with Department of Ecology on the limited amendments to the SMP and the Department of Ecology has provide the City their Findings and Conclusions from their public process and required and recommended amendments as set forth in Exhibit F, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 9. Effective Date of Provisions. The provisions set forth in Sections 1 through 6 above shall become effective and in full force upon the 14 -days from Washington State Department of Ecology final action approving the amendments of said provisions of this ordinance as set forth herein, subject to Section 9 below. SECTION 10. Severability. If anyone 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 11. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council the day of )2017. ERIC YOUNGER, Council President Approved this day of )2017. ATTEST: SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk PUBLISHED the day of EFFECTIVE the day of ORDINANCE NO. PATTY LENT, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney 2017. 2017. 2016 SMP Amendments Exhibit A Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance DRAFT FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION Summary — The Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed limited amendments to the maps and text of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) for the Growth Management Act 2016 periodic update of the City's Comprehensive Plan. I. FINDINGS OF FACT - GENERAL 1. Project Description The primary impetus for the limited updates of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) is to ensure consistency with the Growth Management Act 2016 periodic update. The limited amendments proposed to the SMP can be summarized as follows: • Updating shoreline designations on three maps, Map B, C and E. Maps B and C had Single Family Residential designation for a few parcels amended to Multi -family Residential to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation change to recognize the existing higher density neighborhood (most of those parcels are currently development with multi -family structures). Map E proposes to fix a mapping error of approximately 600' lineal feet of shoreline to be amended from Commercial Shoreline designation to Multi -Family Residential to be consistent with the current Land Use designation, in the Downtown Subarea Plan (this area is just south of the Manette Bridge, off Washington Avenue). Provide consistency to City's Critical Area Ordinance (CAO, Bremerton Municipal Code, BMC 20.14) and the SMP. The CAO was adopted in 2006 and the SMP in 2013. As best available science (BAS) was used in the SMP and CAO, the SMP had portions of the code that superseded the CAO as the adoption was later. Within this periodic update the CAO is proposing to be updated with BAS, thus the portions in the SMP related to CAO are slated for removal and the CAO will be amended separately). • Revise the 7.090 Use Matrix to allow "Single Family Residential uses" in Recreational and Commercial designations. There is a SMP policy that identifies that single family residential development is a priority use on the shoreline (SMP 8.080), thus this amendment would provide further consistency. 2. Procedural History The Shoreline Master Program (SMP) updates were drafted, reviewed and recommended for adoption after a series of public workshops and a hearing. 2.1 Initial Work Program Released: Planning Commission Workshop — September 15, 2014 Discussed the Comprehensive Plan Update, including the Work Program, Public Participation Exhibit A Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance Process, and overview of the schedule. Encouraging comments from the public regarding the Work Program. This sets the framework for the 2 -years including updating the functioning documents such as the Shoreline Master Program update process. o 2.1(a) Shoreline Master Program Past History — 2010 through 2013. The SMP was adopted in December 4, 2013 by Ordinance Number 5229 after a three-year extensive project with substantial public involvement and coordination of multiple agencies. • 2.2 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. • 2.3 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. 2.4 Planning Commission Public Process for Comprehensive Plan Update - January 20, 2015 — November 17, 2015 Planning Commission held two open houses, 7 workshops and one public hearing on the 2016 Draft Comprehensive Plan. The Public Hearing was November 17, 2015 which was approved unanimously for City Council's consideration. Updating the Shoreline Master Program was continually part of the discussion and identified in the draft 2016 Comprehensive Plan. o 2.4(a) Planning Commission Workshop — July 21, 2015 During this workshop, a GAP analysis was provided for the public and Planning Commission's consideration by The Watershed Company that compared the Critical Area Ordinance with relevant sections of the City's Shoreline Master Program in order to bring the two regulatory documents into alignment with each other and with best available science. This analysis was also provided at the February 2016 workshop. • 2.5 Zoning Code Amendments Planning Commission Workshop— February 16, 2016 Planning Commission held a public workshop on the Zoning Code Update related to the Comprehensive Plan amendments. The specific topics were: a few Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) chapters, and limited amendments to Shoreline Master Program. • 2.6 Zoning Code and Subarea Plan Amendments Planning Commission Workshop — March 15, 2016 Planning Commission held a public workshop on the Zoning Code Update related to the Comprehensive Plan amendments. The specific topics focused on Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) chapters, however an additional change to Map E in the SMP was discussed at this Workshop. • 2.7 Notice of Intent to Adopt - Department of Commerce — March 17, 2016 A 60 -day notice of intent to adopt the Comprehensive Plan, Bremerton Municipal Code, Subarea Plans and the Shoreline Master Program were provided to Department of Commerce and the Puget Sound Regional Council for their review of the plans. • 2.8 Planning Commission Public Hearing—April 19, 2016 Draft text and maps of the limited amendment to the SMP were release in advance of the April 19, 2016 public hearing with proper noticing. Planning Commission deliberated and made recommendation to City Council for adoption. • 2.9 Compliance with the Public Participation Program The following are actions that were taken to ensure compliance with the early and continuous public participation identified in the Public Participation Program approved by Resolution in November 2014 for the Comprehensive Plan Update (which includes further publication for the Shoreline Master Program limited amendments notice). 2 Exhibit A Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance 0 2.9(a) Adequate Noticing: For the Comprehensive Plan update: standard notification of each workshop with a letter or email notice to the interested parties and posting of the Planning Commission Workshop in the Kitsap Sun, and approximately 9,000 notices were mailed twice to all City property owners in January 2015 (prior to an first Open House) and October 2015 (prior to the Public Hearing). Specific public notice that stated "Limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program" were for the: ■ February 16, 2016 Public Workshop; and ■ April 19, 2016 Public Hearing 0 2.9(b) Website: www.Bremerton2035.com was continual referred to and updated with planning commission packets and draft documents, comments, upcoming meeting notices, etc. 0 2.9(c) Video: Staff participated in the September's Growing Bremerton Together with Potty Lent to talk about the Comprehensive Plan Update and get interested in the project (repeated on BKAT and available online, https.//vimeo.com/139257812). 0 2.9(d) Additional Outreach: Staff provide presentation on the City's Comprehensive Plan update to the following clubs to further outreach: Lions Club in May 2015, Home Builder Association of Kitsap in Summer 2015, and Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council (KRCC) in March 2016. 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, postcards, and public testimony at workshops and hearings that Planning Commission considered. No public comment was received regarding the limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program. 4. SEPA Determination As the City is updating the current (2004) Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, Subarea Plans and the Shoreline Master Program, 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. No appeals were filed. S. Consistency 5.1 The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan update that is regulated by 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 (until 2036). 5.2 The proposal is consistent with Department of Ecology and the Shoreline Management Act rules per RCW 90.58 and WAC 173-26 for limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program. 5.3 The recommended limited amendments will result in minor modifications to the development and use potential of certain areas. As there the amendments to the maps Exhibit A Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance are for areas that are already existing multi -family development, there is minimal modification potential. Modification potential will be reviewed like all other land uses to result in an overall no net loss per the City's SMP. 5.4 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 and workshops at the Planning Commission 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. 5.5 The Planning Commission acknowledges the Department of Ecology public process for limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program that occurs after the City Council adoption. III. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission concludes that the proposed limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program, corresponding to the 2016 Growth Management Act Periodic update are consistent with the Growth Management Act, Department of Ecology requirements for limited amendments and the draft 2016 Comprehensive Plan. The Commission concludes that the proposed limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program are adequate for consistency throughout the City documents, and appropriately updated in a limited way. Respectfully submitted by: 4 Approved by: Nick Wofford, Chk Planning Commission Exhibit B Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance Chapter 4 — Shoreline Maps and Designations 4.010 — Intent 4.020 — Maps 4.030 — Designations 4.040 — Shorelines of Statewide Significance 4.020 Maps: The following maps are the official maps of the Shoreline Master Program. Legend UGA Boundary City Boundary Designations Urban Conservancy Recreation Multi -Family Residential Single Family Residential IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Commercial Downtown Waterfront Industrial Isolated Exhibit B Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance Elwood Point Madrona Point Ostrich Bay Oyster Bay Mud Bay Phinney Bay k KITSAP WAY �1 Data Sources: Kitsap County, City of Bremerton, Parametra, Bremerton Shoreline Master Program N Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 0 0.25 National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) Map B Note: Shoreline jurisdiction boundaries depicted on this map are approximate Miles and are intended for planning purposes only. Additional site-specific evaluation January 25, 2016 may be needed to confirm/verify information shown on this map. 0 Exhibit B Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance Legend NW RIDDELL RD NE RIDDELL RD UGA Boundary City Boundary -- - -- Designations --- - Urban Conservancy - -__ ---_ -__ W , Recreation _------- - Multi -Family Residential ---- ---- -_-- W - Single Family Residential --- d - RL Downtown Commercial -- _ ----- Downtown Waterfront ---- ---- --- Industrial -- Isolated f - -- Bass Point 0 Phinney Buy 0 W Z SYLVAN WAY a SHERIDAN RD �1 Data Sources: Kitsap County, City of Bremerton, Parametra,Bremerton Shoreline Master Program Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department N of Natural Resources, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 0.25 National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Note: Shoreline jurisdiction boundaries depicted on this map are approximate Miles and are intended for planning purposes only. Additional site-specific evaluation January 25, 2016 may be needed to confirm/verify information shown on this map. Map C Legend UGA Boundary City Boundary Designations Urban Conservancy Recreation Multi -Family Residential Single Family Residential IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Commercial Downtown Waterfront Industrial Isolated 11TH ST Exhibit B Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance ��9A O,y �9y W z LU 4� f� 6TH ST 304 BURWELL ST let 5"I'lleldl, III ^1 Data Sources: Kitsap County, City of Bremerton, Parametra, Bremerton Shoreline Master Program N Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 0 0.25 National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) Map E Note: Shoreline jurisdiction boundaries depicted on this map are approximate Miles and are intended for planning purposes only. Additional site-specific evaluation January 28, 2016 may be needed to confirm/verify information shown on this map. Exhibit C Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance Chapter 5 - Permit Administration 5.010 — Applicability 5.020 — Permit Application Types 5.030 — Noticing Requirements 5.040 — Criteria of Approval 5.050 — Appeals 5.060 — Time Periods 5.070— Violations and Penalties 5.080 — Shoreline Moratorium 5.090 — Restoration Project Relocation of OHWM 5.010 Applicability: (a) Liberal Construction: All regulations applied within the shoreline shall be liberally construed to give full effect to the objectives and purposes for which they have been enacted. Shoreline Master Program policies establish intent for the shoreline regulations in addition to RCW 90.58 and Chapter 173 of the Washington Administrative Code 173-26 and 173-27. (b) Burden of Proof: The applicants for any permit shall have the burden of proving that the proposed development is consistent with the criteria as set out in the Shoreline Management Act. (c) Development Permit Compliance: (1) For all development within shoreline jurisdiction, the responsible official shall not issue a development or construction permit or an exemption for such development until compliance with the Shoreline Master Program has been documented. If a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required, no permit shall be issued until all comment and appeal periods have expired. Any development permit for work within the shoreline jurisdiction (200' from the OHWM) shall be subject to the same terms and conditions that apply to the shoreline permit. (2) Critical Areas in the shoreline jurisdiction are regulated by the Critical Areas Regulations, (times ^nc rry )49, Ord. 5301 (exh B) (part), 2017: Ord. 4965 Section 7 art 2006), codified under BMC 20.14 which is herein incorporated into this SMP however, the following sections of the Critical Area Ordinance do not apply: (i) BMC 20.14.145(d) Exemptions for Forest Practices; (ii) BMC 20.14.145(f) Exemptions for activities within improved Right -of -Way; (iii)BMC 20.14.155 Reasonable Use Exception; (iN,),�z 14 .200 Definition of "We ' . ( iv BMC 20.14.330(f) & (g) & (h)(3)(44 Standard Wetland Buffer Widths; C-°T7���40C�CiMitigation Repruc€mepi c-ccrrcrenrrcarceflieff%ccrcr6s; (vii) BN4G 20.14.730(d) Table 1 i Watef Type Btt�r- Sta-Hdafd. (}(v) BMC 20.14.730(d)(5) Buffer Reduction; Exhibit C Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance (d) Constitutional limitations: Regulation of private property to implement any Program goals, such as public access and protection of ecological functions, must be consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations. These include, but are not limited to, property rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Washington State Constitution, applicable federal and state case law, and state statutes, such as RCW 34.05.328 and 43.21C.060. (e) Agency coordination: The city will coordinate on issues relating to ecological conditions, functions and processes and on wetland and ordinary high water delineations with the Department of Ecology, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, Suquamish Tribe, as well as other agencies with permit authority over a project to the extent that agencies are timely in their response and coordination does not interfere with meeting timelines for permit review. (f) Compliance with other regulatory requirements: Compliance with the provisions of this chapter does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may be required (for example, , Hydraulic Permit Act (HPA) permits, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permits, Washington State Department of Ecology Water Quality Certification (Section 401) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits). The applicant is responsible for complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in this chapter. (Ord. 1164 § 4, 2004). (g) Permit Revisions: An application for a permit revision is required whenever the applicant proposes substantive changes to the design, terms, or conditions of a project that has an approved permit. The City may approve a revision, rather than requiring a separate shoreline permit provided the revision is within the scope and intent of the original permit, and is consistent with all applicable standards within the SMP and SMA. Should the revision be found to be within the scope and intent of the original permit the City may approve the revision and submit it to the Department of Ecology. Pursuant to WAC 173-27-100 "Within the scope and intent of the original permit" means all of the following: (1) No additional overwater construction is involved except that pier, dock or float construction may be increased by five hundred square feet or ten percent (10%) from the provisions of the original permit, whichever is less: (2) Ground area coverage and height may be increased a maximum of ten percent (10%) from the provisions of the original permit; (3) The revised permit does not authorize development toe exceed height, lot coverage, setback, or any other requirements of the SMP except as authorized under a variance granted as the original permit or a part thereof, (4) Additional or revised landscaping is consistent with any conditions attached to the original permit and with the SMP; (5) The use authorized pursuant to the original permit is not changed; and (6) No adverse environmental impacts will be caused by the project revision. (h) Exemptions: A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit shall be required for all proposed use and development within the shoreline jurisdiction unless the proposal is specifically exempt from Exhibit C Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance permit requirements pursuant to WAC 173-27-040. The City issues exemptions for all work that does not meet the threshold for a shoreline permit to be required. The following list of exemptions is an exact copy from the WAC, and is located here as a courtesy to the reader. Any exemptions adopted subsequently by the legislature shall apply without amendment to this program. An exemption from a shoreline permit is not an exemption from compliance with the Act or the Shoreline Master Program, or from any other regulatory requirements. Exemptions shall be construed narrowly. Only those developments that meet the precise terms of one or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemption from the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit process. Exemptions are as follows: (1) Any development of which the total cost or fair market value, whichever is higher, does not exceed five thousand dollars, if such development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The dollar threshold established in this subsection must be adjusted for inflation by the office of financial management every five years, beginning July 1, 2007, based upon changes in the consumer price index during that time period. "Consumer price index" means, for any calendar year, that year's annual average consumer price index, Seattle, Washington area, for urban wage earners and clerical workers, all items, compiled by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, United States Department of Labor. The office of financial management must calculate the new dollar threshold and transmit it to the office of the code reviser for publication in the Washington State Register at least one month before the new dollar threshold is to take effect. For purposes of determining whether or not a permit is required, the total cost or fair market value shall be based on the value of development that is occurring on shorelines of the state as defined in RCW 90.58.030 (2)(c). The total cost or fair market value of the development shall include the fair market value of any donated, contributed or found labor, equipment or materials; (2) Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition. "Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to shoreline resource or environment. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, and the replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment; (3) Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences. A "normal protective" bulkhead includes those structural and nonstructural developments installed at or near, and parallel to, the ordinary high water mark for the sole purpose of protecting an existing single-family residence and appurtenant structures from loss or damage by erosion. A normal protective bulkhead is not exempt if constructed for the purpose of creating dry land. When a vertical or near vertical wall is being constructed or reconstructed, not more than one cubic yard of fill per one foot of wall may be used as backfill. When an existing bulkhead is being repaired by construction of a vertical wall fronting the existing wall, it shall be constructed no further waterward of the existing bulkhead than is necessary for construction of Exhibit C Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance new footings. When a bulkhead has deteriorated such that an ordinary high water mark has been established by the presence and action of water landward of the bulkhead then the replacement bulkhead must be located at or near the actual ordinary high water mark. Beach nourishment and bioengineered erosion control projects may be considered a normal protective bulkhead when any structural elements are consistent with the above requirements and when the project has been approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. (4) Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. An "emergency" is an unanticipated and imminent threat to public health, safety, or the environment which requires immediate action within a time too short to allow full compliance with this chapter. Emergency construction does not include development of new permanent protective structures where none previously existed. Where new protective structures are deemed by the administrator to be the appropriate means to address the emergency situation, upon abatement of the emergency situation the new structure shall be removed or any permit which would have been required, absent an emergency, pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW, these regulations, or the local master program, obtained. All emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies of chapter 90.58 RCW and the local master program. As a general matter, flooding or other seasonal events that can be anticipated and may occur but that are not imminent are not an emergency; (5) Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, construction of a barn or similar agricultural structure, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures including but not limited to head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels: Provided, That a feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a commercial nature, alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other than that which results from normal cultivation, shall not be considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations; (6) Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys; (7) Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single- family residence for their own use or for the use of their family, which residence does not exceed a height of thirty-five feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW. "Single-family residence" means a detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one family including those structures and developments within a contiguous ownership which are a normal appurtenance. An "appurtenance" is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment of a single-family residence and is located landward of the ordinary high water mark and the perimeter of a wetland. On a statewide basis, normal appurtenances include a garage; deck; driveway; utilities; fences; installation of a septic tank and drainfield and grading which does not exceed two hundred fifty cubic yards and which does not involve placement of fill in any wetland or waterward of the ordinary high water mark. Local circumstances may dictate additional interpretations of normal appurtenances which shall be set forth and regulated Exhibit C Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance within the applicable master program. Construction authorized under this exemption shall be located landward of the ordinary high water mark; (8) Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for the private noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single- family and multiple -family residences. A dock is a landing and moorage facility for watercraft and does not include recreational decks, storage facilities or other appurtenances. This exception applies if either: (i) In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed two thousand five hundred dollars; or (ii) In fresh waters the fair market value of the dock does not exceed ten thousand dollars, but if subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, the subsequent construction shall be considered a Substantial Development for the purpose of this chapter. (iii) For purposes of this section salt water shall include the tidally influenced marine and estuarine water areas of the state including the Pacific Ocean, Strait of Juan de Fuca, Strait of Georgia and Puget Sound and all bays and inlets associated with any of the above; (9) Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored groundwater from the irrigation of lands; (10) The marking of property lines or corners on state-owned lands, when such marking does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water; (11) Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system; (12) Any project with a certification from the governor pursuant to chapter 80.50 RC W; (13) Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for development authorization under this chapter, if: (i) The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters; (ii) The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including but not limited to fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values; (iii) The activity does not involve the installation of any structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity; (iv) A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure that the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and(v) The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550; Exhibit C Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance (14) The process of removing or controlling aquatic noxious weeds, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the department of agriculture or Ecology jointly with other state agencies under chapter 43.21C RCW; (15) Watershed restoration projects as defined herein. Local government shall review the projects for consistency with the shoreline master program in an expeditious manner and shall issue its decision along with any conditions within forty-five days of receiving all materials necessary to review the request for exemption from the applicant. No fee may be charged for accepting and processing requests for exemption for watershed restoration projects as used in this section. (i) "Watershed restoration project" means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following activities: (A) A project that involves less than ten miles of stream reach, in which less than twenty-five cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings; (B) A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or (C) A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizens of the state, provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or in -stream habitat enhancement structure associated with the project, is less than two hundred square feet in floor area and is located above the ordinary high water mark of the stream. (ii) "Watershed restoration plan" means a plan, developed or sponsored by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, Ecology, the department of natural resources, the department of transportation, a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority, a city, a county, or a conservation district that provides a general program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re-creation, or enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area, or watershed for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW, the State Environmental Policy Act; (16) A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply: (i) The project has been approved in writing by the Department of Fish and Wildlife; (ii) The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.55 RCW; and Exhibit C Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance (iii) The local government has determined that the project is substantially consistent with the local shoreline master program. The local government shall make such determination in a timely manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent. (iv) Fish habitat enhancement projects that conform to the provisions of RCW 77.55.181 are determined to be consistent with local shoreline master programs, as follows: (A) In order to receive the permit review and approval process created in this section, a fish habitat enhancement project must meet the following and (II) of this subsection: (I) A fish habitat enhancement project must be a project to accomplish one or more of the following tasks: Elimination of human -made fish passage barriers, including culvert repair and replacement; or restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank employing the principle of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or Placement of woody debris or other in -stream structures that benefit naturally reproducing fish stocks. The Department of Fish and Wildlife shall develop size or scale threshold tests to determine if projects accomplishing any of these tasks should be evaluated under the process created in this section or under other project review and approval processes. A project proposal shall not be reviewed under the process created in this section if the department determines that the scale of the project raises concerns regarding public health and safety; and (II) A fish habitat enhancement project must be approved in one of the following ways: By the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.95 or 77.100 RCW; or By the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan as provided in chapter 89.08 RCW; or • By the department as a Department of Fish and Wildlife -sponsored fish habitat enhancement or restoration project; • Through the review and approval process for the jobs for the environment program; • Through the review and approval process for conservation district -sponsored projects, where the project complies with design standards established by the conservation commission through interagency agreement with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the natural resource conservation service; • Through a formal grant program established by the legislature or the Department of Fish and Wildlife for fish habitat enhancement or restoration; and • Through other formal review and approval processes established by the legislature. (B) Fish habitat enhancement projects meeting the criteria of (p)(iii)(A) of this subsection are expected to result in beneficial impacts to the environment. Decisions pertaining to fish habitat enhancement projects meeting the criteria of (p)(iii)(A) of this subsection and being reviewed and approved according to the provisions of this section are not subject to the requirements of RCW 43.21C.030 (2)(c). (C)(I) A hydraulic project approval permit is required for projects that meet the criteria of (p)(iii)(A) of this subsection and are being reviewed and approved under this section. An applicant shall use a joint aquatic resource permit application form developed by the Exhibit C Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance Office of Regulatory Assistance to apply for approval. On the same day, the applicant shall provide copies of the completed application form to the Department of Fish and Wildlife and to each appropriate local government. Local governments shall accept the application as notice of the proposed project. The Department of Fish and Wildlife shall provide a fifteen -day comment period during which it will receive comments regarding environmental impacts. Within forty- five days, the department shall either, issue a permit, with or without conditions, deny approval, or make a determination that the review and approval process created by this section is not appropriate for the proposed project. The department shall base this determination on identification during the comment period of adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated by the conditioning of a permit. If the department determines that the review and approval process created by this section is not appropriate for the proposed project, the department shall notify the applicant and the appropriate local governments of its determination. The applicant may reapply for approval of the project under other review and approval processes. (C)(11) Any person aggrieved by the approval, denial, conditioning, or modification of a permit under this section may formally appeal the decision to the hydraulic appeals board pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. (D) No local government may require permits or charge fees for fish habitat enhancement projects that meet the criteria of (p)(iii)(A) of this subsection and that are reviewed and approved according to the provisions of this section. (17) The external or internal retrofitting of an existing structure with the exclusive purpose of compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et sec.) or to otherwise provide physical access to the structure by individuals with disabilities. Exhibit D Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendment Ordinance Chapter 7 - GENERAL STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS 7.010 — Buffers and Setbacks 7.20 — Vegetation Conservation 7.030 — Mitigation Sequencing for No Net Loss of Habitat Function 7.040 — Public Access 7.050 — Water Quality, Stormwater, and Non -Point Pollution 7.060 — Archaeologically Sensitive Areas 7.070 — Lighting Requirements 7.080 — Parking Requirements 7.090 — Use Matrix and Height Table 7.010 Buffers and Setbacks, Upland areas adjacent to the shoreline perform essential functions necessary to sustain habitat and ecological processes. It is for this reason that development must be set back from the water's edge and that natural buffers must be created and or preserved. The City currently regulates such areas through the Critical Areas Ordinance (Ordinance 4965 codified in BMC 20.14), however in areas regulated by this document within the shoreline jurisdiction, the following policies and regulations will supersede those within the Critical Area Regulations: Policies: (a) The critical areas that are within the shoreline jurisdiction are to be protected and managed in such a manner that the result of any use, activity, or development is no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. (b) The City should protect critical areas and their existing shoreline ecological functions so they continue to contribute to existing ecosystem wide processes. (c) The City should promote uses and values that are compatible with other objectives of this section, such as public access and native vegetation management, provided there is no significant adverse impact to shoreline ecological functions. Regulations: (a) Critical Area Ordinance Applicability: Critical Areas that are within the shoreline jurisdiction are regulated by the Critical Areas Regulations, (Ordiiia-Ree 4�09Ord. 5301 Section 3 (Exh B) (part), 2016, Ord. 4965 Section 7 (part). 2006), codified under BMC 20.14 which is herein incorporated into this SMP however, the following sections of the Critical Area Ordinance do not apply: • BMC 20.14.145(d) Exemptions for Forest Practices; • BMC 20.14.145(f) Exemptions for activities within improved Right -of -Way; • BMC 20.14.155 Reasonable Use Exception; • BN4G 20.142200 De€initien ef "Wetlands". Widths; • BN4G 20 i n 3400 e. (g) M tig tie Replacement and a„h,,,,, efRe„t n„ti--, • BN4G 20 i n 730(d) rr.,i.ie- 1: Wat€t: Type Btt�t: St at:d. • BMC 20.14.330(f) Category III and IV Wetlands, • BMC 20.14.330(8)) Category IV Wetlands Exhibit D Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendment Ordinance • BMC 20.14.330(h)(3) Reducing Wetland Buffer Widths, and • BMC 20.14.730(d)(5) Buffer Reduction; • BN4C 20 i n 730 (av4) Habitat Gense...,,,tie f:e Btt rs• �5= 4-5� 4-5-� �5= -641 -4-0' M Wildlife Ipttfi.t;e (2i 2S) 45, �$5= High F„ t; (30 36 ;,N,ildlife peif+�S) �5= 2115' 2115' 414 �5= N�A N�A 1 I � Wetland Mitigation Type and R€plaee i ent Ratio* Wetland �',circ i$ffl Re ost.,b.l;sb.m en Re -14 -b l;t.,tiE T�„ � Y Gateeef:y4 61 &. 4-z Not allowedr' 4 J —f 1rrvr -. -4 -. -.-Y � 4 Y r-m'eeef�--u G^J f — - -2 iz—- . i r. i 4-4 Gn J 1 I � Exhibit D Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendment Ordinance (0 (bb) Shoreline Buffers and Setbacks: (1) The following table defines required buffers and setbacks for Type S waters. Buffers an setbacks for all other non -shoreline waters (Type F, Type Np, and Type Ns) are defined in BMC 10.14.730(d), Table 1. odes the bu„ rs and setbacks established fat: Fi4 afid Wildlife Habitat Gef+set=va6eii Afeas iii (BMG 20.14.730(d)) as felle;,N,si DESIGNATION Minimum Building Buffer Width Setback Standard URBAN CONSERVANCY 15 feet beyond buffer SINGLE FAMILY & MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Lot depth less than 125' 5 feet beyond buffer Lot depth 125' to 199" 10 feet beyond buffer Lot depth greater than 200' 15 feet beyond buffer RECREATIONAL 15 feet beyond buffer COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL/ DOWNTOWN 15 feet beyond WATERFRONT buffer ISOLATED None 175 feet 20% of lot depth 20% of lot depth 30% of lot depth (Maximum of 100') 100 feet 50 feet None 1. Please note: For all designations, setbacks and buffers listed above the following shall apply: 2. Where lot depth is less than 150 feet on Commercial or Recreational lots, the buffers listed above may be reduced to 20% of the lot depth. 3. In no case shall a buffer be less than 10' or greater than 100' in the Shoreline Residential Designation. 4. Buffers are measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark. (2) Buffers and Associated Building Setback Areas: The distance of the buffer shall be measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Buffers shall remain undisturbed natural beach or vegetation areas except where the buffer can be enhanced to improve its functional attributes, as approved by the Department. Buffers shall be maintained along the perimeter of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas, as outlined in the table above. Refuse, garbage, or debris shall not be placed in the buffers or on the beach. o . ithi b tt rs (0 (bb) Shoreline Buffers and Setbacks: (1) The following table defines required buffers and setbacks for Type S waters. Buffers an setbacks for all other non -shoreline waters (Type F, Type Np, and Type Ns) are defined in BMC 10.14.730(d), Table 1. odes the bu„ rs and setbacks established fat: Fi4 afid Wildlife Habitat Gef+set=va6eii Afeas iii (BMG 20.14.730(d)) as felle;,N,si DESIGNATION Minimum Building Buffer Width Setback Standard URBAN CONSERVANCY 15 feet beyond buffer SINGLE FAMILY & MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Lot depth less than 125' 5 feet beyond buffer Lot depth 125' to 199" 10 feet beyond buffer Lot depth greater than 200' 15 feet beyond buffer RECREATIONAL 15 feet beyond buffer COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL/ DOWNTOWN 15 feet beyond WATERFRONT buffer ISOLATED None 175 feet 20% of lot depth 20% of lot depth 30% of lot depth (Maximum of 100') 100 feet 50 feet None 1. Please note: For all designations, setbacks and buffers listed above the following shall apply: 2. Where lot depth is less than 150 feet on Commercial or Recreational lots, the buffers listed above may be reduced to 20% of the lot depth. 3. In no case shall a buffer be less than 10' or greater than 100' in the Shoreline Residential Designation. 4. Buffers are measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark. (2) Buffers and Associated Building Setback Areas: The distance of the buffer shall be measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Buffers shall remain undisturbed natural beach or vegetation areas except where the buffer can be enhanced to improve its functional attributes, as approved by the Department. Buffers shall be maintained along the perimeter of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas, as outlined in the table above. Refuse, garbage, or debris shall not be placed in the buffers or on the beach. Exhibit D Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendment Ordinance (3) Determining Lot Depth: Areas inundated with water are not included in the calculation for lot depth, therefore the measurement may be taken from the OHWM. For lots with varying lot depth, the average depth may be used. (4) Habitat Management Plans: Within shoreline jurisdiction, the requirements for a Habitat Management Plan as provided in BMC 20.14.730€ and depicted within Table 2: Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas shall be determined on a case-by-case basis only as needed to incorporate Fish & Wildlife Conservation Areas not addressed by the requirements of 7.030 Mitigation Sequencing for No Net Loss of Ecological Functions. The provisions of the Critical Area Ordinance (BMC 20.14.740) relating to Habitat Management Plans may also be used to justify a reduction in the width of a shoreline buffer to no less than ten (10) feet provided enhancement features are installed that will provide a greater habitat function than the prescribed buffer would. (5) Setback and Buffer Averaging: The Director may grant modifications to the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area buffer and setbacks required provided: (i) Sixty (60%) percent or more of like structures along the shoreline within the same numbered block as the subject property are setback less than the required buffer/setback required by the SMP. The average of the like structures may be used as a modified buffer for the proposal; and (ii) In addition to the buffer, a minimum of a 5' setback shall be required for the structure; and (iii) No new structure may have a buffer of less than ten (10') feet. (6) Fences: Fences are allowed to be erected in the side yard abutting the fish and wildlife conservation area buffer, but are prohibited within the buffer. Fences may also be erected upland of the buffer including within the shoreline setback area. General development standards for fences are located in BMC 20.44.020. Guardrails may be erected in association with pedestrian access areas provided they do not function as a fence and comply with the International Building Code. (b}�q)_Exemptions: The following development activities are not subject to fish and wildlife habitat area buffers and setbacks, provided they are constructed and maintained in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on shoreline ecological functions, and further provided that they comply with all the applicable regulations in BMC Title 20 and this Program: (1) Those portions of an approved water -oriented development that require a location waterward of the ordinary high water mark, and/or within their associated buffers and setbacks; (2) Development activities on lots that are physically and functionally separated from shoreline by an improved paved public or private road or railroad or similar facility and/or by one or more existing developed lots under separate ownership such that the ecological functions provided by buffers do not occur. This provision shall not apply to such a facility within a development proposal or contiguous ownership that can be feasibly relocated to accommodate buffers. Exhibit D Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendment Ordinance (3) Underground utilities; (4) Modifications to existing development that are necessary to comply with environmental requirements of any agency when otherwise consistent with this Program, provided that the City determines that: (i) The facility cannot meet the dimensional standard and accomplish the purpose for which it is intended; and (ii) The facility is located, designed, and constructed to meet specified dimensional standards to the maximum extent feasible; and (iii) The modification is in conformance with the provisions for non -conforming development and uses. (5) Roads, railways, and other essential public facilities that must cross shorelines and are necessary to access approved water -dependent development uses are subject to development standards in Chapter 8, section 090. (6) Stairs, ADA ramps, and walkways not greater than 5 feet in width or 18 inches in height above grade, not including railings. (7) Shared moorages shall not be subject to side yard setbacks when located on or adjacent to a property line shared in common by the project proponents and where appropriate easements or other legal instruments have been executed providing for ingress and egress to the facility. Exhibit E Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance 7.090 Use Matrix and Height Table: (a) Use Matrix: The table determines which shoreline modifications and shoreline uses are allowed or prohibited in each Shoreline Designation. (1) Except for the land uses prohibited in this table, land uses allowed in the underlying zoning are allowed in the Master Program, subject to the preference for water -oriented uses and subject to specific criteria for uses included in these regulations. This chart is not exhaustive of all uses addressed in the zoning code. When referring to unlisted uses, the code is referring neither to uses listed here nor in the zoning code. If a use is prohibited in the underlying zoning district, it is also prohibited within the shoreline. (2) Aquatic Uses are determined by the adjacent Designation and are limited to water -dependent uses and public access. (3) Land uses in the underlying zoning that require a Conditional Use Permit, require a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. (4) Land uses are defined in BMC 20.42 the definitions section of the zoning code. Shoreline activities are defined in the definitions section of this code. (5) A use located within the "Isolated" designation shall not be governed by the performance standards within SMP Chapter 7, General Standards and Regulations; Chapter 8, Shoreline Use Regulations, or Chapter 9 Shoreline Modifications, however the Director may determine the proposed development or use is clearly contrary to the intent of this program, and relevant elements of this program may be applied. Development and land use within this designation shall be governed by all other regulations of BMC Title 20 Land Use. The mandatory permit and procedural requirements of this program contained in Chapter 5, Permit Administration, shall apply to said development or uses. KEY: ct CG X= Prohibited o P= Permitted CU= Conditional Use Cd a O Cd cp CG v U w ; o Cd Z3 o o vi U Unlisted Uses: I CU ICU CU CU I CU CU CU UPLAND USES Boat Sales, Storage and Repair X X X CU P P P Commercial uses such as but not limited to: general retail, general office, clinics, restaurants, drinking places, personal services athletic fields, restaurants, community X X X X P P P facilities, and entertainment uses. (See Zoning Code for specific allowed uses by zone) Exhibit E Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance KEY: ct _CG X= Prohibited o P= Permitted CU= Conditional Use ct O ct c p ctv o o -:) v� U Community, Cultural, Educational Facilities CU P P P P P X Golf Courses X CU CU X X X X Hotels and Lodging X X X X P P X Industrial X X X X X X P Worship and Religious Facilities X CU P CU 1 P P tLx-- PARKING & UTILITIES Parking Serving Primary Use Within the Shoreline Jurisdiction P P P P P P P Parking Not Serving Primary Use Within the Shoreline Jurisdiction X X X X CU CU CU Transportation facilities that serve uses within the shoreline P P P P P P P Utilities that serve uses within the shoreline P P P P P P P RESIDENTIAL Adult Family Homes, Daycare, & Bed and Breakfasts CU P P X P P X Commercial/Residential mixed X X X X P P X Multi -Family Residential X X P X P P X Single Family Residential P P P XP XP P X SHORELINE MODIFICATIONS (All uses must meet applicable code criteria see Ch. 9) Boat Launch CU CU CU CU CU CU CU Aquaculture (including commercial, non- commercial, and geoduck) CU X X CU CU CU CU Ecological Restoration / Enhancement P P P P P P P Docks, Piers and Other In -Water Structures P P P P P P P Dredging P P P P P P P Flood Hazard Reduction P P P P P P P Mooring Buoys P P P P P P P Marinas CU CU CU CU CU CU CU Stabilization - New and Replacement P P P P P P P Stormwater Management Facilities P P P P P P P RECREATION AND PUBLIC ACCESS Recreation, Non -Water -Oriented CU CU CU CU CU CU CU Recreation, Water -Oriented P P P P P P P Trails, public pedestrian and bicycle not P P P P P P P Exhibit E Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance KEY: ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION ct _CG 35 feet Downtown Waterfront 175 feet Industrial X= Prohibited Multi -Family Residential 40 feet Over -Water Structures (All Designations) 15 feet Recreation o Single Family Residential P= Permitted Urban Conservancy 25 feet Table Notes: The height limit is restricted to that portion of the building physically located within the shoreline jurisdiction. CU= Conditional Use ct O ct c p v ct vi U including overwater trails OUTRIGHTLY PROHIBITED USES Adult Entertainment X X X X X X X Agriculture X X X X X X X Automobile Sales Service & Repair X X X X X X X Figure 7.090 (b) Height Restrictions: Table 7.090(b) ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION HEIGHT Commercial 35 feet Downtown Waterfront 175 feet Industrial 35 feet Multi -Family Residential 40 feet Over -Water Structures (All Designations) 15 feet Recreation 35 feet Single Family Residential 30 -35' feet Urban Conservancy 25 feet Table Notes: The height limit is restricted to that portion of the building physically located within the shoreline jurisdiction. This table establishes the allowable height in each designation based on the type of use. All the applicable City standards still apply. In the event the provisions of this Program conflict with provisions of other regulations, the more restrictive shall prevail. Height measurement is defined in Chapter 3. (a) Heights in the commercial & industrial districts may be increased to the zoning district height limit through a Conditional Use Permit provided: (1) The increase does not substantially block views from upland residential properties; (2) Greater height is demonstrated to be needed for an essential element of an allowed use. (3) The project may be required to include compensating elements that substantially enhance the visual and physical public access to the shoreline. (4) It is demonstrated that No Net Loss of habitat function will be achieved. Exhibit E Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance (b) Single Family Residential heights may be increased to 35' with the employment of a pitched roof when: (1) The pitch of the roof is not less than 6:12 (2) The pitched roof is oriented perpendicular to the shoreline. Minor gables or other roof features parallel to the shoreline may be permitted on a case by case basis provided such features do not extend past the pitched roof where views are intended to be preserved. (3) The pitched roof covers the entire structure. Exhibit F Shoreline M STAT Program Limited Amendments Ordinance 0� d x yn O 1889 � STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PO Box 47600 • Olympia, WA 98504-7600 • 360-407-6000 711 for Washington Relay Service o Persons with a speech disability can call 877-833-6341 April 25, 2017 The Honorable Patty Lent City of Bremerton 345 Sixth Street, Suite 600 Bremerton, WA 98337 Re: City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendment — Conditional Approval, Ordinance 5300 Dear Mayor Lent: I would like to take this opportunity to commend the City of Bremerton (City) for its efforts in developing the proposed amendments to the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). It is obvious that a significant effort was invested by your staff. The amendments make changes to the City's SMP in order to make it consistent with the City's recently updated Comprehensive Plan and incorporate updated provisions from the City's Critical Areas Ordinance. We have completed our review of the proposal for consistency with the Shoreline Management Act and implementing guidelines. As we have already discussed with your staff, the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) identified specific changes necessary to make the proposal approvable. These required changes are detailed in Attachment B. Additional recommended changes are included in Attachment C. Ecology's findings and conclusions related to the City's proposed SMP amendment are contained in Attachment A. Pursuant to RCW 90.58.090 (2)(e), at this point, the City may: • Agree to the proposed changes, or • Submit an alternative proposal. Ecology will then review the alternative(s) submitted for consistency with the purpose and intent of the changes originally developed by Ecology and with the Shoreline Management Act. Final Ecology approval will occur after the City responds to Ecology communicating the City's decision on the required and recommended changes. Ecology's final approval will be in the form of a letter, and will be sent upon receipt of the City's written notification that the required changes are acceptable to the City, or after the City and Ecology have reached an agreement on alternative language that meets the statutory and Guidelines requirements. Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance The Honorable Patty Lent April 25, 2017 Page 2 Please provide your written response within 30 days to the Director's Office at the following address: WA State Department of Ecology Attention: Director's Office PO Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-6700 Thank you again for your efforts to continue to improve the City's SMP. We look forward to receiving your written response and concluding this SMP amendment in the near future. If you have any questions or would like to discuss Ecology's proposed changes, please contact our regional planner, Misty Blair, at Misty.Blair@ecy.wa.g_ov/(425) 649-4309. Sincerely, y G�� Maia D. Bellon Director Enclosures By Certified Mail [91 7108 2133 3939 7125 5436] cc: Allison Satter, City of Bremerton Misty Blair, Ecology Joe Burcar, Ecology Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance ATTACHMENT A: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS FOR PROPOSED LIMITED AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF BREMERTON'S SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM SMP Submittal accepted July 13, 2016, Ordinance No. 5300 Prepared by Misty Blair on April 17, 2017 Brief Description of Proposed Amendment: The City of Bremerton has submitted to Ecology for review a limited amendment to its Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The City Council adopted the amendment (Ordinance No. 5300) on May 18, 2016. The purpose of the limited amendment is to incorporate updated Critical Areas regulations and ensure consistency between the SMP and recently updated Comprehensive Plan. The Critical Areas regulations were recently updated to incorporate best available science, eliminating the need for separate critical areas regulations within the SMP. The City has opted to remove the redundant regulations from the SMP and incorporate more of critical areas regulations as a means to provide the same level of critical areas protection. SMP environment designation maps were amended to match recent Land Use Map changes, particularly to recognize the Medium Density Residential (MDR) and Multifamily Designation (MR) within the shoreline jurisdiction and accurately reflect the existing and planned multifamily residential development in these areas. Regional staff recommends approval of the proposed limited amendment subject to both required changes (Attachment B) and recommended changes (Attachment Q. FINDINGS OF FACT Need for amendment. The proposed changes are intended as minor adjustments to portions of the City of Bremerton SMP. According to the City, the proposed amendments are needed: to provide consistency between the SMP and the Comprehensive Plan; for ease of implementation of the critical areas regulations; and to accurately reflect the existing and planned development patterns within SMP Map areas B, C, and E. The original City SMP was approved by Ecology in 1977 with major amendments in 1989, 1992 and with amendments for the Downtown Development Standards in 2003. The City's SMP comprehensive amendment process pursuant to RCW 90.58.080 and 100 was completed in December 2013. SMP provisions to be changed by the amendment as proposed: The following sections of the existing City SMP are proposed for change: Section 4.020 Maps Map B & Map C — Re -designating a portion of shoreline from "Single Family Residential" to "Multi -Family Residential" shoreline designation. Map E — Re -designating a portion of shoreline from "Commercial" to Multi -Family Residential" shoreline designation. Section 5.010, incorporating the following updated Critical Areas Regulations BMC 20.14.200, Definitions of "Wetlands" BMC 20.14.330(f)(1) Standard Wetland Buffer Widths BMC 20.14.340(f) & (g) Mitigation Replacement and Enhancement Ratios BMC 20.14.730(d) Table 1: Water Type Buffer Standard Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance City of Bremerton SMP Limited Amendment, Attachment A April 17, 2017 Page 2 of 5 BMC 20.14.730(d)(5) Buffer Reduction BMC 20.14.730(d)(8) Habitat Conservation Area Buffer Section 7.010, deleting the above referenced Critical Areas Regulation exclusions and the following Regulations: (b) Wetland Buffers, and (c) Wetland Mitigation, Section 7.090, modifying the Use Matrix Table to permit Single Family Residential within the Recreation and Commercial shoreline environment designations. Amendment History, Review Process: The city indicates the proposed SMP amendments originated from a local planning process related to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) updates. This process began with a Planning Commission Workshop on September 15, 2014. The City commissioned a CAO Gap Analysis that was completed by The Watershed Company on July 7, 2015. The stated secondary purpose of this analysis was to compare the CAO with relevant sections of the City's Shoreline Master Program in order to bring the two regulatory documents into alignment with each other. Affidavits of publication provided by the City indicate notice of the hearing was published in the Kitsap Sun on April 7, 2016. The record shows that a public hearing regarding the SMP Amendment before the Planning Commission was held on April 19, 2016. The City received one comment on May 18, 2016 from the Suquamish Tribe, this comment was subsequently submitted again during the state public comment period and is included in the comment response summary (Attachment D). The associated Critical Areas Amendment, effecting the provisions of Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 20.14 were provided to Ecology for review and all recommendations contained within Paul Anderson's May 11, 2016 comment letter were incorporated into the final adopted version. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended the proposed limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program. City Council held an additional public hearing and considered the proposed SMP limited amendment on May 18, 2016. With passage of Ordinance No. 5300, on May 18, 2016, the City authorized staff to forward the proposed amendments to Ecology for approval. The proposed SMP amendments were received by Ecology for state review and verified as complete on July 13, 2016. Notice of the state comment period was distributed to state task force members and interested parties identified by the City on August 3, 2016, in compliance with the requirements of WAC 173-26-120, and as follows: The state comment period began on August 3, 2016 and continued through August 19, 2016. No public hearing was held during the state comment period. Four (4) comment letters were received during the comment period. Ecology sent all written comments it received along with a summary matrix table to the City on September 16, 2016. The City requested and was provided additional time to respond to comments. On January 3, 2017 the City submitted to Ecology its responses to issues raised during the state comment period. A copy of the City's response along with Ecology's response to public comments is included as Attachment D. Consistency with Chapter 90.58 RCW: The proposed amendment has been reviewed for consistency with the policy of RCW 90.5 8.020 and the approval criteria of RCW 90.58.090(3), (4) and (5). The City has also provided evidence of its compliance with SMA procedural requirements for amending their SMP contained in RCW 90.58.090(1) and (2). Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance City of Bremerton SMP Limited Amendment, Attachment A April 17, 2017 Page 3 of 5 Consistency with "applicable guidelines" (Chapter 173-26 WAC, Part III): The proposed amendment has been reviewed for compliance with the requirements of the applicable Shoreline Master Program Guidelines (WAC 173-26-171 through 251 and 173-26-020 definitions). Consistency with Limited Amendment Criteria: The proposed amendment has also been reviewed for compliance with WAC 173-26-201(1)(c) of the SMP Guidelines. The amendment is necessary to improve consistency with the Act's goals, policies and implementing rules applicable to shorelines of the state within the local government (WAC 173-26-201(1)(c)(i)(D) and to correct errors and omissions (WAC 173- 26-201(1)(c)(i)(E). The City of Bremerton is not currently conducting a comprehensive shoreline master program (WAC 173-26-201(1)(c)(ii). The proposed amendments will not foster uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state's shorelines (WAC 173-26-201(1)(c)(iii). The amendment is consistent with all applicable policies and standards of the Act (WAC 173-26-201(1)(c)(iv). All procedural rule requirements for public notice and consultation have been satisfied (WAC 173-26-201(1)(v). The master program guidelines analytical requirements and substantive standards have been satisfied, as applicable to the amendments. The amendments will not result in a net loss of shoreline ecological functions (WAC 173- 26-201(1)(c)(vi). Consistency with SEPA Requirements: The City submitted evidence of SEPA compliance in the form an issued Addendum to a Determination of Significance with Adoption of Existing Environmental Document for the City of Bremerton 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update which included the proposed SMP amendments on November 3, 2015. Ecology did not comment. Other Studies or Analyses supporting the SMP update: Ecology also reviewed the following documents prepared by the City in support of the SMP amendment: • A July 14, 2015 technical memorandum to the City from The Watershed Company providing a Critical Areas Ordinance Gap Analysis, Identified as Attachment VI; and, • The City's updated Critical Areas Ordinance, identified as Attachment VII (Portions of Ordinance 5301 effective June 3, 2016), as well as the entirety of Ordinance 5301; and, • The City's updated Land Use Maps, identified as Attachment VIII (Portion of Ordinance 5299 effective June 3, 2016); and, Summary of Issues Raised During The Public Review Process: The City's SMP limited amendment drafting/public review process coincided with the City's Comprehensive Plan Update and Critical Areas Regulations update. During the local public participation period, only one comment was received related to the SMP limited amendment. During the Ecology public comment period four (4) comment letters were received. Public comments centered on the following topics: • One comment was received supporting the limited amendment and requesting no changes. • One comment was received requesting the limited amendment be denied based on a lack of information regarding the Chico Creek and Gorst Creek Watersheds, specifically related to their contributing and draining basins. • One comment was received requesting that the City add a statement to the Applicability section (BMC 20.16.5 10) acknowledging that the Navy does not have to comply with the City's SMP requirements. • One comment letter contained several concerns related to CAO provisions which are proposed for incorporation into the SMP. Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance City of Bremerton SMP Limited Amendment, Attachment A April 17, 2017 Page 4 of 5 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW After review by Ecology of the complete record submitted and all comments received, Ecology concludes that the City's proposed limited SMP amendment, subject to and including Ecology's required changes (itemized in Attachment B), is consistent with the policy and standards of RCW 90.58.020 and RCW 90.58.090 and the applicable SMP guidelines (WAC 173-26-171 through 251 and .020 definitions). This includes a conclusion that the proposed SMP amendment, subject to required changes, contains sufficient policies and regulations to assure that no net loss of shoreline ecological functions will result from implementation of the new master program amendments (WAC 173-26- 201(2)(c)(5) and WAC 173-26-186(8). Ecology also concludes that a separate set of recommended changes to the submittal (identified during the review process and itemized in Attachment C) would be consistent with SMA policy and the guidelines and would be beneficial to SMP implementation. These changes are not required, but can, if accepted by the City, be included in Ecology's approved SMP amendments. Consistent with RCW 90.58.090(4), Ecology concludes that those SMP segments relating to critical areas within Shoreline Management Act jurisdiction provide a level of protection to critical areas located within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources. Ecology concludes that the City has complied with the requirements of RCW 90.58.100 regarding the SMP amendment process and contents. Ecology concludes that the proposed amendments satisfy the criteria for approval of limited amendments found in WAC 173-26-201(1)(c). Ecology concludes that the City has complied with the requirements of RCW 90.58.130 and WAC 173-26-090 regarding public and agency involvement in the SMP amendment process. Ecology concludes that the City has complied with the purpose and intent of the local amendment process requirements contained in WAC 173-26-100, including conducting public hearings, notice, consultation with parties of interest and solicitation of comments from tribes, government agencies and Ecology. Ecology concludes that the City has complied with requirements of Chapter 43.21 C RCW, the State Environmental Policy Act. Ecology concludes that the City's SMP amendment submittal to Ecology was complete pursuant to the requirements of WAC 173-26-110 and WAC 173-26-201(3)(a). Ecology concludes that it has complied with the procedural requirements for state review and approval of shoreline master program amendments as set forth in RCW 90.58.090 and WAC 173-26-120. Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance City of Bremerton SMP Limited Amendment, Attachment A April 17, 2017 Page 5 of 5 DECISION AND EFFECTIVE DATE Based on the preceding, Ecology has determined the proposed amendments to this SMP are consistent with the policy of the Shoreline Management Act, the applicable guidelines and implementing rules, once required changes set forth in Attachment B are approved by the City. Ecology approval of the proposed amendments, with required changes, is effective 14 days from Ecology's final action approving the amendment. As provided in RCW 90.58.090(2)(e)(ii) the City may choose to submit an alternative to all or part of the changes required by Ecology. If Ecology determines that the alternative proposal is consistent with the purpose and intent of Ecology's original changes and with RCW 90.58, then the department shall approve the alternative proposal and that action shall be the final action on the amendment. Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance CD O O 0 W O CD Cn N CD CD n CD Cn Cn v O n O \CC G. CD Cn D C0 O C31 Cb N CL CD G) C. CD ICIDA VJ /1 n v W N O rNr AA ^w � J `/ 3 CD0 fMF W M 0 tIj �0 CL 0 N � � M K 0 (D (n (D O CL O (D 70 C to c Cn 3 3m •om Oto CD� --o. o f35H n CCD CD v O (D I Z ;aDo 5 XD° -,, cCDCD00 CD C-) ..OD ° -° 00 m .,: -c 0)o 0 —� 0 — o Cf) o CCD n nL < C'����� (D N Q W w� C) a) W� Co CD a cc - 0-01 �X acs n �'� WW00 n ��� —0 v -- o' -n cp o 0 7.=.,�D� n� C�CiC)-0 � 0 C-1) WN (D c� � o aW� 000-o rj C:) ��� �w C m am sv m � ���o 4h. CD � D�O0)07 !'m X00 �m D n•~ o c =r m 0) w�0-� U1 �. A �N 0 sa (D O A. Q• Cn w� CD -, Q N . (a 0 c ., w w o o cn cQ (n A Cn 0 n n ?_ n m v°�� v vmQ- v Q• mo CL CL 3� 3•m cp �:• Oy Cnwrn m U1s0m �,m mm 0 cn v m c m -pn0 �a CD m m --40-10 >= moo 3@.-1. 0 p� � m °•o m a� CLCn 0a Q -' (D CD � CD v 0 O N w :3 c 3'< �� 0U)"a �wC=6.cn (n o � 3 0� m �_ � °i M. o C) Q• m o o v° 3. 0 -A cc c cQ c �. O a CD -4 (D m a -' x v Q• n Cn -„- o 0) a O `G CD -0 - CL ° �+ v. D CD r+ n 0 m < m cD O X ai m S CA CD "� � O O OF 0 CL 0• II O cc Q (D Covm0M��DmDm-'"0C D c Qu)cn E.0 j 'tai O� 9'CL 0fl:c X Q K Oa m= 3 d 0 Q (D con Q - w N Qym 3 c w• ,, C=DT _� 0 ,CLCD � Z v m om° 0 �mv�m �. I v o r' � m -1 rs m 03.E r m v W��°—CD .�--�g`�.o�, C mm= CD 3� n Cr Cn Ch Q "0 G 5-0 Cn cD = � (D O p) �.'G CD �, mOoo0n�w cD mCn D MOo•>>cn Q `. 7— -43Q° ° 0 3 '. m� d n CD°• m m° mom° 5. � CA =: N CL—. (D � n O � 0 (3D � 0 C !v _= = N O (D c N R' O (0 m O- d-0 0 Q.�a�fl-n•m ° 0 �� o C Q.�2;v� fl.° m °•nom (n'° o -ti o ,� O -4 < 0.ao m (D c 3 (D � m 0 0 O (D 0. O a 0 O Q r.0 Q -W C CM) 0 Sm �m �•�� �K CQ ! o �(n 00 � �. =W'ao3• _ °-�,� v �< �mmD CDD CD o� 0 w Q �+ Z cn Xw a -0 3 m � N E r-9. CD O O 0 W O CD Cn N CD CD n CD Cn Cn v O n O \CC G. CD Cn D C0 O C31 Cb N CL CD G) C. CD ICIDA VJ /1 n v W N O rNr AA ^w � J `/ 3 CD0 fMF W M 0 tIj �0 CL 0 Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance Z O Ln w O O • • • • • • • 0o ao 00 00 � oo m ao g oo � ao P PPaC)UP Pm P _a Q -..% � y � = � - _a S 0 ���� 3 -th,"' wP-4�-, W-- W W Co U7 CDD � � O O O O M a 07 U1 U7 W 0 N w CD' Ip 3 m W (D (D O i� CD 0 3 X CDCD N N C O O 0 0 _ = <= (D 0) 0 C� N O CD G C aC CD p �+ Cn O < CD CD O a G n O N O O Q Q Z' N v? cD N Z O Ln w O O Exhibit F Shoreline Master Program Limited Amendments Ordinance 0� CD (n o_ rr — � �C ? n D� CD CD c0 CD O O coo 3 CDD O = n' Q CD N Q O CL n CD v Cn,Z �CD CD �3 C CD CD Cn r -r _• 0 CD ap Cn =r CD C7 C) Cn -4 C -4 CD � N T CL N =r CD CD CD CZ CD CD =' CD Q. P !rt 0 0 X CD0 0 M CL CL 0 CD U) M O O a' 0 O 3 ��=tnootn� m-o�oCntn � = v Qr° 000 CD o < Cr0 c°n�r:� m CD c 3 0 3 cn� Q) °Cn n cDv�cn��-0Cn a Cn CD o =3 j O 3 CD a �CC Cn CDv 0 O � CD p N 0 � Cn 0 n 0 X. CL CA N 0 3 CD C3D C n 3 u Q= Ch a � �_o S. Cn m m v = s° -n Cr ° 0 3 z m 3 Z 0- = w ,°�' a� m � .� �o 0 3 0 acn 3 P, v _- C) Cn CD 0) ,� o m Co °.w CD s •m0 co m Cr-, CD c° O r 3 ° o =.ate ° v �'" °Cn'3:3 CD C) �� CD c � � D N N c°n�"ain CD w 7 Q O N 3 N D 3 :3 O VD °' nQ3 (DCL � < < cam o 3= 3' O 0) 01 Q. cn n�+o(D .-. v .� M. m Cll 0 @ (Mn O CLCD 3 CD pO 3 3 oQLin C CD CD - 0 D C Cr CD v 0= 0 . ,, 3 OCD W O? D CD N -� 3 2 C7 D - .� z v 0 CD N O Crm � 0 -n or � O'er► N 3 � 3 ? CD 3' (ii D "' 0)CD fnoCD CD 3 um (n -. v � c �' N ow a o- a � go v N o * 3 0 - Cn � W �' X X� N o O O w _, -K0-no c� ��D r, D3 C 0 C1 v, sll -� �Cn 3 c CD C � Q 3 CD a .-. O a c O O 3 a 3 3 Co' n Q Cll N CD q� !v 0 O fn O 0 tD 3 -s 3 a Q' CD 3 .n_• M Q �; Fn• fn N a O G�� S O -_ Co 3 Cll 0•w CT Cn CD 7 ° 0 =� 3 c r (D O cn Q' 3 CD o .3� �+ Q. CD Cn 0 O .+ cn a c 3 (D m� 0 3cD�'',� �� 3O=' 0 oCDCD ��O n O N CD K O-4 n n CD Cn 0 (n Cn -UO3 000-0 =a0 v 0 o CD 70 C7 N) 0 S•smm n ., Cr 3 Q 3• -°p `C ,rt c ,_: Sv 0 M 3 `< a Cr 3 0 v 0 0 m o o ,rt v v < ' `< n m x cQ O c CD 3 amino o cn c o -- ;:w ac v, m cr 3 �.-•w fn Q C)3 v 0 v a0<< Quo ==3 Cn a)a�cL E cn o m w° v 33305' 6- o c Z am 0 cn �0, <•a ��,�0 �Co0 D n°v3io�C���°=DQ'3 rva-0°n� °oma 3�cu°`� CL m CD CD .. �D z 0 3 3 a<cn 3 w CD CD n -Dov° " c c o m x � -°gym _� sll C m vc°n -amm3c1~ v0 sv w 70 CD �'Q= a CD ,SCD a� M3"w� O �mow.w CL CD CD 0) CD < N � > < CD CD Z 0" 3 _ _ — 1< Cr v Cn = CD 0 N D 0 N 0 0 CD M 0��� 0 3" N 0 D ar Cn CD O� CD � m Q CD 0 es o D3 �0Cn01 Ln.nvCDmcoCLCn S•' vinto Cn �, 03 � .o < go co n CL 0 3 T CD 0 ^ � O° a c c 3 r. CD <• CD 0 CD -0 CD x: W �Q<o�m3'*���D3vcn�i�CL w --h(D SCDD om�w 3 .n. CD 3 v 00 w = CDO a3�`< CD 3 (n a 3 N 3 n O= CD °» 3° O 0'N W s CD Q a(D =� -"_� O CD �.-. CD c 0 3 0- "O co ch =a. (D CD CD m 0,c v 0 "O " W 3 v� (D •_~ rn x, " (D n m n to O 0 � � � Cr O 0 p - � Cn CD CD 0_ w 3 o N O O N cc n CSD = r= O CD N x CD W J.n 3 Cn 3 0 0 S. Q- (0 z 0 to n Q �. (n CD O 0 93 C) aim° CD v0 [7� h cDPQ o D = w m a CD 3 p Fn. 3. 0� CD (n o_ rr — � �C ? n D� CD CD c0 CD O O coo 3 CDD O = n' Q CD N Q O CL n CD v Cn,Z �CD CD �3 C CD CD Cn r -r _• 0 CD ap Cn =r CD C7 C) Cn -4 C -4 CD � N T CL N =r CD CD CD CZ CD CD =' CD Q. P !rt 0 0 X CD0 0 M CL CL 0 CD U) Attachment I ORDINANCE NO. 5300 AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington providing limited amendments to the City of Bremerton Shoreline Master Program. WHEREAS, the people of the State of Washington enacted the Shoreline Management Act (Chapter 90.58 RCW) by a vote of the people in 1971; and WHEREAS, The Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) (RCW 36.70A.480) adds the goals and policies of the Shoreline Management Act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020 as one of the goals of the Growth Management Act without creating an order of priority; and WHEREAS, in 2003, The Department of Ecology adopted rules, pursuant to RCW 90.58.200, which gave procedural and substantive direction to local jurisdictions for updating shoreline uses and regulations, which became effective January 17, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 5229 on December 4, 2013 adopting the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) after approval of Department of Ecology, to be compliant with RCW 90.58.020 and WAC 173-26-186; and WHEREAS, the 2013 SMP adoption included widespread public notice and involvement held over fourteen (14) workshops and a public hearing at the Planning Commission and a series of four televised City Council workshops; and WHEREAS, the City is concurrently updating the Comprehensive Plan (under a separate ordinance) pursuant to the GMA and the schedule provided in RCW 36.70A.130 that requires an update of the Comprehensive plan by no later than June 30, 2016; WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan update has made several land use map updates that required limited amendments to the SMP including text and mapping amendments to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070; 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, on March 17, 2016, amendments to the SMP were circulated to the State Agencies for the requisite 60 -day review and comment period; and WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton Planning Commission considered staff's recommendations, received testimony, and formulated a recommendation for SMP limited update to the City Council for consideration at a duly advertised public hearing on April 19, 2016; and 2016 SMP Amendments Page 1 of 28 Attachment I 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; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findinzs and Recitals Incorporated. The findings and recitals set forth above are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. Planning Commission Findings Adopted. 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. Chapter 4 - Shoreline Maps and Designations Amended. Chapter 4 of the Shoreline Master Program as adopted by Ordinance No. 5299 is hereby amended by amending Section 4.020 entitled "Maps" as set forth in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 4. Chapter S - Permit Administration Amended. Chapter 5 of the Shoreline Master Program as adopted by Ordinance No. 5299 is hereby amended by amending Section 5.010 entitled "Applicability" as set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION S. Chapter 7 - General Standards and Regulations Amended. Chapter 7 of the Shoreline Master Program as adopted by Ordinance No. 5299 is hereby amended by amending Section 7.010 entitled "Buffers and Setbacks" as set forth in Exhibit D, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 6. Chapter 7 - General Standards and Regulations Amended. Chapter 7 of the Shoreline Master Program as adopted by Ordinance No. 5299 is hereby amended by amending Section 7.090 entitled "Use Matrix and Height Table" as set forth in Exhibit E, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 7. Effective Date of Provisions. The provisions set forth in Sections 1 through 6 above shall become effective and in full force and effect upon the date of approval by the Washington State Department of Ecology of said provisions of this ordinance as set forth herein, subject to Section 9 below. SECTION 8. 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 9 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. 2 2016 SMP Amendments Page 2 of 28 Attachment I PASSED by the City Council the day of , 2016 — /,, Y,= ERIC YOU ER, C ncil President Approved this —L day of %%? , 2016 ATTEST: (%44 SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk ff / � U 4, ,���►6 APPROVED AS TO FORM: qROGR A. LUBOVICH, ivy ttomey PUBLISHED the day of , 2016 EFFECTIVE the — day of , 2016 ORDINANCE NO. v0D R:\Legal\Legal\Ordinances\Community Development\2016 SMP Amendment - Final.doc 2016 SMP Amendments Page 3 of 28 Exhibit A Shoreline Master Progravht0chnnmidd DRAFT FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION Summary — The Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed limited amendments to the maps and text of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) for the Growth Management Act 2016 periodic update of the City's Comprehensive Plan. I. FINDINGS OF FACT - GENERAL 1. Project Description The primary impetus for the limited updates of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) is to ensure consistency with the Growth Management Act 2016 periodic update. The limited amendments proposed to the SMP can be summarized as follows: • Updating shoreline designations on three maps, Map B, C and E. Maps B and C had Single Family Residential designation for a few parcels amended to Multi -family Residential to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation change to recognize the existing higher density neighborhood (most of those parcels are currently development with multi -family structures). Map E proposes to fix a mapping error of approximately 600' lineal feet of shoreline to be amended from Commercial Shoreline designation to Multi -Family Residential to be consistent with the current Land Use designation, in the Downtown Subarea Plan (this area is just south of the Manette Bridge, off Washington Avenue). Provide consistency to City's Critical Area Ordinance (CAO, Bremerton Municipal Code, BMC 20.14) and the SMP. The CAO was adopted in 2006 and the SMP in 2013. As best available science (BAS) was used in the SMP and CAO, the SMP had portions of the code that superseded the CAO as the adoption was later. Within this periodic update the CAO is proposing to be updated with BAS, thus the portions in the SMP related to CAO are slated for removal and the CAO will be amended separately). • Revise the 7.090 Use Matrix to allow "Single Family Residential uses" in Recreational and Commercial designations. There is a SMP policy that identifies that single family residential development is a priority use on the shoreline (SMP 8.080), thus this amendment would provide further consistency. 2. Procedural History The Shoreline Master Program (SMP) updates were drafted, reviewed and recommended for adoption after a series of public workshops and a hearing. 2.1 Initial Work Program Released: Planning Commission Workshop — September 15, 2014 Discussed the Comprehensive Plan Update, including the Work Program, Public Participation Page 4 of 28 Exhibit A Shoreline Master Progravht0chnmidd Process, and overview of the schedule. Encouraging comments from the public regarding the Work Program. This sets the framework for the 2 -years including updating the functioning documents such as the Shoreline Master Program update process. o 2.1(a) Shoreline Master Program Past History — 2010 through 2013. The SMP was adopted in December 4, 2013 by Ordinance Number 5229 after a three-year extensive project with substantial public involvement and coordination of multiple agencies. • 2.2 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. • 2.3 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. 2.4 Planning Commission Public Process for Comprehensive Plan Update - January 20, 2015 — November 17, 2015 Planning Commission held two open houses, 7 workshops and one public hearing on the 2016 Draft Comprehensive Plan. The Public Hearing was November 17, 2015 which was approved unanimously for City Council's consideration. Updating the Shoreline Master Program was continually part of the discussion and identified in the draft 2016 Comprehensive Plan. o 2.4(a) Planning Commission Workshop — July 21, 2015 During this workshop, a GAP analysis was provided for the public and Planning Commission's consideration by The Watershed Company that compared the Critical Area Ordinance with relevant sections of the City's Shoreline Master Program in order to bring the two regulatory documents into alignment with each other and with best available science. This analysis was also provided at the February 2016 workshop. • 2.5 Zoning Code Amendments Planning Commission Workshop— February 16, 2016 Planning Commission held a public workshop on the Zoning Code Update related to the Comprehensive Plan amendments. The specific topics were: a few Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) chapters, and limited amendments to Shoreline Master Program. • 2.6 Zoning Code and Subarea Plan Amendments Planning Commission Workshop — March 15, 2016 Planning Commission held a public workshop on the Zoning Code Update related to the Comprehensive Plan amendments. The specific topics focused on Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) chapters, however an additional change to Map E in the SMP was discussed at this Workshop. • 2.7 Notice of Intent to Adopt - Department of Commerce — March 17, 2016 A 60 -day notice of intent to adopt the Comprehensive Plan, Bremerton Municipal Code, Subarea Plans and the Shoreline Master Program were provided to Department of Commerce and the Puget Sound Regional Council for their review of the plans. • 2.8 Planning Commission Public Hearing—April 19, 2016 Draft text and maps of the limited amendment to the SMP were release in advance of the April 19, 2016 public hearing with proper noticing. Planning Commission deliberated and made recommendation to City Council for adoption. • 2.9 Compliance with the Public Participation Program The following are actions that were taken to ensure compliance with the early and continuous public participation identified in the Public Participation Program approved by Resolution in November 2014 for the Comprehensive Plan Update (which includes further publication for the Shoreline Master Program limited amendments notice). Page 5 of 28 Exhibit A Shoreline Master Progravht0chn d 0 2.9(a) Adequate Noticing: For the Comprehensive Plan update: standard notification of each workshop with a letter or email notice to the interested parties and posting of the Planning Commission Workshop in the Kitsap Sun, and approximately 9,000 notices were mailed twice to all City property owners in January 2015 (prior to an first Open House) and October 2015 (prior to the Public Hearing). Specific public notice that stated "Limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program" were for the: ■ February 16, 2016 Public Workshop; and ■ April 19, 2016 Public Hearing 0 2.9(b) Website: www.Bremerton2035.com was continual referred to and updated with planning commission packets and draft documents, comments, upcoming meeting notices, etc. 0 2.9(c) Video: Staff participated in the September's Growing Bremerton Together with Potty Lent to talk about the Comprehensive Plan Update and get interested in the project (repeated on BKAT and available online, htt s: vimeo.com 139257812). 0 2.9(d) Additional Outreach: Staff provide presentation on the City's Comprehensive Plan update to the following clubs to further outreach: Lions Club in May 2015, Home Builder Association of Kitsap in Summer 2015, and Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council (KRCC) in March 2016. 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, postcards, and public testimony at workshops and hearings that Planning Commission considered. No public comment was received regarding the limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program. 4. SEPA Determination As the City is updating the current (2004) Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, Subarea Plans and the Shoreline Master Program, 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. No appeals were filed. S. Consistency 5.1 The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan update that is regulated by 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 (until 2036). 5.2 The proposal is consistent with Department of Ecology and the Shoreline Management Act rules per RCW 90.58 and WAC 173-26 for limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program. 5.3 The recommended limited amendments will result in minor modifications to the development and use potential of certain areas. As there the amendments to the maps 3 Page 6 of 28 Exhibit A Shoreline Master PrograAtOchnnmidd are for areas that are already existing multi -family development, there is minimal modification potential. Modification potential will be reviewed like all other land uses to result in an overall no net loss per the City's SMP. 5.4 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 and workshops at the Planning Commission 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. 5.5 The Planning Commission acknowledges the Department of Ecology public process for limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program that occurs after the City Council adoption. III. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission concludes that the proposed limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program, corresponding to the 2016 Growth Management Act Periodic update are consistent with the Growth Management Act, Department of Ecology requirements for limited amendments and the draft 2016 Comprehensive Plan. The Commission concludes that the proposed limited amendments to the Shoreline Master Program are adequate for consistency throughout the City documents, and appropriately updated in a limited way. Respectfully submitted by: Approved by: Nick Wofford, Char; Planning Commis, on 4 Page 7 of 28 Chapter 4 — Shoreline Maps and Designations 4.010 — Intent 4.020 — Maps 4.030 — Designations 4.040 — Shorelines of Statewide Significance 4.020 Maps: The following maps are the official maps of the Shoreline Master Program. Attachment I Page 8 of 28 Legend UGA Boundary City Boundary Designations Urban Conservancy Recreation Multi -Family Residential Single Family Residential IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Commercial Downtown Waterfront Industrial Isolated Elwood Point Madrona Point Ostrich Bay OA 7A fn Z� w 2� Oyster Bay Attachment I Mud Bay Phinney Bay C KITSAP WAY �1 Data Sources: Kitsap County, City of Bremerton, Parametra, Bremerton Shoreline Master Program N Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 0 0.25 National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) Map B Note: Shoreline jurisdiction boundaries depicted on this map are approximate Miles and are intended for planning purposes only. Additional site-specific evaluation January 25, 2016 may be needed to confirm/verify information shown on this map. Page 9 of 28 Attachment I Legend NW RIDDELL RD NE RIDDELL RD UGA Boundary City Boundary -- - -- Designations --- - Urban Conservancy - -__ ---_ -__ W , Recreation _------- - Multi -Family Residential ---- ---- -_-- W - Single Family Residential --- r1 - IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII- Commercial -- _ ----- Downtown Waterfront ---- ---- --- Industrial -- Isolated f - -- Bass Point 0 Phinney Buy 0 W Z SYLVAN WAY a SHERIDAN RD �1 Data Sources: Kitsap County, City of Bremerton, Parametra, Bremerton Shoreline Master Program Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department N of Natural Resources, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 0 0.25 National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) Map C Note: Shoreline jurisdiction boundaries depicted on this map are approximate Miles and are intended for planning purposes only. Additional site-specific evaluation January 25, 2016 may be needed to confirm/verify information shown on this map. Page 10 of 28 Legend UGA Boundary City Boundary Designations Urban Conservancy Recreation Multi -Family Residential Single Family Residential IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Commercial Downtown Waterfront Industrial Isolated 11TH ST Attachment I W z LU 4� f� 6TH ST 304 BURWELL ST let 5"I'lleldl, III ^1 Data Sources: Kitsap County, City of Bremerton, Parametra, Bremerton Shoreline Master Program N Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 0 0.25 National Wetlands Inventory(NWI) Map E Note: Shoreline jurisdiction boundaries depicted on this map are approximate Miles and are intended for planning purposes only. Additional site-specific evaluation January 28, 2016 may be needed to confirm/verify information shown on this map. Page 11 of 28 Attachment I Chapter 5 - Permit Administration 5.010 — Applicability 5.020 — Permit Application Types 5.030 — Noticing Requirements 5.040 — Criteria of Approval 5.050 — Appeals 5.060 — Time Periods 5.070— Violations and Penalties 5.080 — Shoreline Moratorium 5.090 — Restoration Project Relocation of OHWM 5.010 Applicability: (a) Liberal Construction: All regulations applied within the shoreline shall be liberally construed to give full effect to the objectives and purposes for which they have been enacted. Shoreline Master Program policies establish intent for the shoreline regulations in addition to RCW 90.58 and Chapter 173 of the Washington Administrative Code 173-26 and 173-27. (b) Burden of Proof: The applicants for any permit shall have the burden of proving that the proposed development is consistent with the criteria as set out in the Shoreline Management Act. (c) Development Permit Compliance: (1) For all development within shoreline jurisdiction, the responsible official shall not issue a development or construction permit or an exemption for such development until compliance with the Shoreline Master Program has been documented. If a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required, no permit shall be issued until all comment and appeal periods have expired. Any development permit for work within the shoreline jurisdiction (200' from the OHWM) shall be subject to the same terms and conditions that apply to the shoreline permit. (2) Critical Areas in the shoreline jurisdiction are regulated by the Critical Areas Regulations, (Ordinance 4965 2008), codified under BMC 20.14 which is herein incorporated into this SMP however, the following sections of the Critical Area Ordinance do not apply: (i) BMC 20.14.145(d) Exemptions for Forest Practices; (ii) BMC 20.14.145(f) Exemptions for activities within improved Right - of -Way; and (iii)BMC 20.14.155 Reasonable Use Exception_, 20.14.200 Definitien ef "Wetlands". (v) BN4G 20.14.330(f)(1) Standaf:d Wetland Btt�t: Widths; Page 12 of 28 Attachment I (viii) m 4G 20 i n 730(d)(5) Rtc r— Rc titian-; (d) Constitutional limitations: Regulation of private property to implement any Program goals, such as public access and protection of ecological functions, must be consistent with all relevant constitutional and other legal limitations. These include, but are not limited to, property rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Washington State Constitution, applicable federal and state case law, and state statutes, such as RCW 34.05.328 and 43.21C.060. (e) Agency coordination: The city will coordinate on issues relating to ecological conditions, functions and processes and on wetland and ordinary high water delineations with the Department of Ecology, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Fish and Wildlife, Suquamish Tribe, as well as other agencies with permit authority over a project to the extent that agencies are timely in their response and coordination does not interfere with meeting timelines for permit review. (f) Compliance with other regulatory requirements: Compliance with the provisions of this chapter does not constitute compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may be required (for example, , Hydraulic Permit Act (HPA) permits, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permits, Washington State Department of Ecology Water Quality Certification (Section 401) National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits). The applicant is responsible for complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in this chapter. (Ord. 1164 § 4, 2004). (g) Permit Revisions: An application for a permit revision is required whenever the applicant proposes substantive changes to the design, terms, or conditions of a project that has an approved permit. The City may approve a revision, rather than requiring a separate shoreline permit provided the revision is within the scope and intent of the original permit, and is consistent with all applicable standards within the SMP and SMA. Should the revision be found to be within the scope and intent of the original permit the City may approve the revision and submit it to the Department of Ecology. Pursuant to WAC 173-27-100 "Within the scope and intent of the original permit" means all of the following: (1) No additional overwater construction is involved except that pier, dock or float construction may be increased by five hundred square feet or ten percent (10%) from the provisions of the original permit, whichever is less: (2) Ground area coverage and height may be increased a maximum of ten percent (10%) from the provisions of the original permit; (3) The revised permit does not authorize development toe exceed height, lot coverage, setback, or any other requirements of the SMP except as authorized under a variance granted as the original permit or a part thereof, (4) Additional or revised landscaping is consistent with any conditions attached to the original permit and with the SMP; (5) The use authorized pursuant to the original permit is not changed; and Page 13 of 28 Attachment I (6) No adverse environmental impacts will be caused by the project revision. (h) Exemptions A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit shall be required for all proposed use and development within the shoreline jurisdiction unless the proposal is specifically exempt from permit requirements pursuant to WAC 173-27-040. The City issues exemptions for all work that does not meet the threshold for a shoreline permit to be required. The following list of exemptions is an exact copy from the WAC, and is located here as a courtesy to the reader. Any exemptions adopted subsequently by the legislature shall apply without amendment to this program. An exemption from a shoreline permit is not an exemption from compliance with the Act or the Shoreline Master Program, or from any other regulatory requirements. Exemptions shall be construed narrowly. Only those developments that meet the precise terms of one or more of the listed exemptions may be granted exemption from the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit process. Exemptions are as follows: (1) Any development of which the total cost or fair market value, whichever is higher, does not exceed five thousand dollars, if such development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The dollar threshold established in this subsection must be adjusted for inflation by the office of financial management every five years, beginning July 1, 2007, based upon changes in the consumer price index during that time period. "Consumer price index" means, for any calendar year, that year's annual average consumer price index, Seattle, Washington area, for urban wage earners and clerical workers, all items, compiled by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, United States Department of Labor. The office of financial management must calculate the new dollar threshold and transmit it to the office of the code reviser for publication in the Washington State Register at least one month before the new dollar threshold is to take effect. For purposes of determining whether or not a permit is required, the total cost or fair market value shall be based on the value of development that is occurring on shorelines of the state as defined in RCW 90.58.030 (2)(c). The total cost or fair market value of the development shall include the fair market value of any donated, contributed or found labor, equipment or materials; (2) Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. "Normal maintenance" includes those usual acts to prevent a decline, lapse, or cessation from a lawfully established condition. "Normal repair" means to restore a development to a state comparable to its original condition, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, within a reasonable period after decay or partial destruction, except where repair causes substantial adverse effects to shoreline resource or environment. Replacement of a structure or development may be authorized as repair where such replacement is the common method of repair for the type of structure or development and the replacement structure or development is comparable to the original structure or development, including but not limited to its size, shape, configuration, location and external appearance, and the replacement does not cause substantial adverse effects to shoreline resources or environment; Page 14 of 28 Attachment I (3) Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences. A "normal protective" bulkhead includes those structural and nonstructural developments installed at or near, and parallel to, the ordinary high water mark for the sole purpose of protecting an existing single-family residence and appurtenant structures from loss or damage by erosion. A normal protective bulkhead is not exempt if constructed for the purpose of creating dry land. When a vertical or near vertical wall is being constructed or reconstructed, not more than one cubic yard of fill per one foot of wall may be used as backfill. When an existing bulkhead is being repaired by construction of a vertical wall fronting the existing wall, it shall be constructed no further waterward of the existing bulkhead than is necessary for construction of new footings. When a bulkhead has deteriorated such that an ordinary high water mark has been established by the presence and action of water landward of the bulkhead then the replacement bulkhead must be located at or near the actual ordinary high water mark. Beach nourishment and bioengineered erosion control projects may be considered a normal protective bulkhead when any structural elements are consistent with the above requirements and when the project has been approved by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. (4) Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. An "emergency" is an unanticipated and imminent threat to public health, safety, or the environment which requires immediate action within a time too short to allow full compliance with this chapter. Emergency construction does not include development of new permanent protective structures where none previously existed. Where new protective structures are deemed by the administrator to be the appropriate means to address the emergency situation, upon abatement of the emergency situation the new structure shall be removed or any permit which would have been required, absent an emergency, pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW, these regulations, or the local master program, obtained. All emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies of chapter 90.58 RCW and the local master program. As a general matter, flooding or other seasonal events that can be anticipated and may occur but that are not imminent are not an emergency; (5) Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, construction of a barn or similar agricultural structure, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures including but not limited to head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels: Provided, That a feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a commercial nature, alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other than that which results from normal cultivation, shall not be considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations; (6) Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys; Page 15 of 28 Attachment I (7) Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single-family residence for their own use or for the use of their family, which residence does not exceed a height of thirty-five feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to chapter 90.58 RCW. "Single-family residence" means a detached dwelling designed for and occupied by one family including those structures and developments within a contiguous ownership which are a normal appurtenance. An "appurtenance" is necessarily connected to the use and enjoyment of a single-family residence and is located landward of the ordinary high water mark and the perimeter of a wetland. On a statewide basis, normal appurtenances include a garage; deck; driveway; utilities; fences; installation of a septic tank and drainfield and grading which does not exceed two hundred fifty cubic yards and which does not involve placement of fill in any wetland or waterward of the ordinary high water mark. Local circumstances may dictate additional interpretations of normal appurtenances which shall be set forth and regulated within the applicable master program. Construction authorized under this exemption shall be located landward of the ordinary high water mark; (8) Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for the private noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single-family and multiple -family residences. A dock is a landing and moorage facility for watercraft and does not include recreational decks, storage facilities or other appurtenances. This exception applies if either: (i) In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed two thousand five hundred dollars; or (ii) In fresh waters the fair market value of the dock does not exceed ten thousand dollars, but if subsequent construction having a fair market value exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, the subsequent construction shall be considered a Substantial Development for the purpose of this chapter. (iii) For purposes of this section salt water shall include the tidally influenced marine and estuarine water areas of the state including the Pacific Ocean, Strait of Juan de Fuca, Strait of Georgia and Puget Sound and all bays and inlets associated with any of the above; (9) Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored groundwater from the irrigation of lands; (10) The marking of property lines or corners on state-owned lands, when such marking does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water; (11) Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system; Page 16 of 28 Attachment I (12) Any project with a certification from the governor pursuant to chapter 80.50 RCW; (13) Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for development authorization under this chapter, if: (i) The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters; (ii) The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including but not limited to fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values; (iii) The activity does not involve the installation of any structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity; (iv) A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure that the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and(v) The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550; (14) The process of removing or controlling aquatic noxious weeds, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the department of agriculture or Ecology jointly with other state agencies under chapter 43.21C RCW; (15) Watershed restoration projects as defined herein. Local government shall review the projects for consistency with the shoreline master program in an expeditious manner and shall issue its decision along with any conditions within forty-five days of receiving all materials necessary to review the request for exemption from the applicant. No fee may be charged for accepting and processing requests for exemption for watershed restoration projects as used in this section. (i) "Watershed restoration project" means a public or private project authorized by the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan that implements the plan or a part of the plan and consists of one or more of the following activities: (A) A project that involves less than ten miles of stream reach, in which less than twenty-five cubic yards of sand, gravel, or soil is removed, imported, disturbed or discharged, and in which no existing vegetation is removed except as minimally necessary to facilitate additional plantings; (B) A project for the restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank that employs the principles of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or (C) A project primarily designed to improve fish and wildlife habitat, remove or reduce impediments to migration of fish, or enhance the fishery resource available for use by all of the citizens of the state, provided that any structure, other than a bridge or culvert or in -stream habitat enhancement structure associated with Page 17 of 28 Attachment I the project, is less than two hundred square feet in floor area and is located above the ordinary high water mark of the stream. (ii) "Watershed restoration plan" means a plan, developed or sponsored by the Department of Fish and Wildlife, Ecology, the department of natural resources, the department of transportation, a federally recognized Indian tribe acting within and pursuant to its authority, a city, a county, or a conservation district that provides a general program and implementation measures or actions for the preservation, restoration, re- creation, or enhancement of the natural resources, character, and ecology of a stream, stream segment, drainage area, or watershed for which agency and public review has been conducted pursuant to chapter 43.21C RCW, the State Environmental Policy Act; (16) A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage, when all of the following apply: (i) The project has been approved in writing by the Department of Fish and Wildlife; (ii) The project has received hydraulic project approval by the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.55 RCW; and (iii) The local government has determined that the project is substantially consistent with the local shoreline master program. The local government shall make such determination in a timely manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent. (iv) Fish habitat enhancement projects that conform to the provisions of RCW 77.55.181 are determined to be consistent with local shoreline master programs, as follows: (A) In order to receive the permit review and approval process created in this section, a fish habitat enhancement project must meet the following and (II) of this subsection: (I) A fish habitat enhancement project must be a project to accomplish one or more of the following tasks: Elimination of human -made fish passage barriers, including culvert repair and replacement; or restoration of an eroded or unstable stream bank employing the principle of bioengineering, including limited use of rock as a stabilization only at the toe of the bank, and with primary emphasis on using native vegetation to control the erosive forces of flowing water; or Placement of woody debris or other in -stream structures that benefit naturally reproducing fish stocks. The Department of Fish and Wildlife shall develop size or scale threshold tests to determine if projects accomplishing any of these tasks should be evaluated under the process created in this section or under other project review and approval processes. A project proposal shall not be reviewed under the process created in this section if the department determines that the scale of the project raises concerns regarding public health and safety; and (II) A fish habitat enhancement project must be approved in one of the following ways: By the Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.95 or 77.100 RCW; or By the sponsor of a watershed restoration plan as provided in chapter 89.08 RCW; or Page 18 of 28 Attachment I • By the department as a Department of Fish and Wildlife -sponsored fish habitat enhancement or restoration project; • Through the review and approval process for the jobs for the environment program; • Through the review and approval process for conservation district -sponsored projects, where the project complies with design standards established by the conservation commission through interagency agreement with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the natural resource conservation service; • Through a formal grant program established by the legislature or the Department of Fish and Wildlife for fish habitat enhancement or restoration; and • Through other formal review and approval processes established by the legislature (B) Fish habitat enhancement projects meeting the criteria of (p)(iii)(A) of this subsection are expected to result in beneficial impacts to the environment. Decisions pertaining to fish habitat enhancement projects meeting the criteria of (p)(iii)(A) of this subsection and being reviewed and approved according to the provisions of this section are not subject to the requirements of RCW 43.21C.030 (2)(c). (C)(I) A hydraulic project approval permit is required for projects that meet the criteria of (p)(iii)(A) of this subsection and are being reviewed and approved under this section. An applicant shall use a joint aquatic resource permit application form developed by the Office of Regulatory Assistance to apply for approval. On the same day, the applicant shall provide copies of the completed application form to the Department of Fish and Wildlife and to each appropriate local government. Local governments shall accept the application as notice of the proposed project. The Department of Fish and Wildlife shall provide a fifteen -day comment period during which it will receive comments regarding environmental impacts. Within forty-five days, the department shall either, issue a permit, with or without conditions, deny approval, or make a determination that the review and approval process created by this section is not appropriate for the proposed project. The department shall base this determination on identification during the comment period of adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated by the conditioning of a permit. If the department determines that the review and approval process created by this section is not appropriate for the proposed project, the department shall notify the applicant and the appropriate local governments of its determination. The applicant may reapply for approval of the project under other review and approval processes. (C)(II) Any person aggrieved by the approval, denial, conditioning, or modification of a permit under this section may formally appeal the decision to the hydraulic appeals board pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. (D) No local government may require permits or charge fees for fish habitat enhancement projects that meet the criteria of (p)(iii)(A) of this subsection and that are reviewed and approved according to the provisions of this section. Page 19 of 28 Attachment I Chapter 7 - GENERAL STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS 7.010 — Buffers and Setbacks 7.20 — Vegetation Conservation 7.030 — Mitigation Sequencing for No Net Loss of Habitat Function 7.040 — Public Access 7.050 — Water Quality, Stormwater, and Non -Point Pollution 7.060 — Archaeologically Sensitive Areas 7.070 — Lighting Requirements 7.080 — Parking Requirements 7.090 — Use Matrix and Height Table 7.010 Buffers and Setbacks: Upland areas adjacent to the shoreline perform essential functions necessary to sustain habitat and ecological processes. It is for this reason that development must be set back from the water's edge and that natural buffers must be created and or preserved. The City currently regulates such areas through the Critical Areas Ordinance (Ordinance 4965 codified in BMC 20.14), however in areas regulated by this document within the shoreline jurisdiction, the following policies and regulations will supersede those within the Critical Area Regulations: Policies: (a) The critical areas that are within the shoreline jurisdiction are to be protected and managed in such a manner that the result of any use, activity, or development is no net loss of shoreline ecological functions. (b) The City should protect critical areas and their existing shoreline ecological functions so they continue to contribute to existing ecosystem wide processes. (c) The City should promote uses and values that are compatible with other objectives of this section, such as public access and native vegetation management, provided there is no significant adverse impact to shoreline ecological functions. Regulations: (a) Critical Area Ordinance Applicability: Critical Areas that are within the shoreline jurisdiction are regulated by the Critical Areas Regulations, (Ordinance 4965 2008), codified under BMC 20.14 which is herein incorporated into this SMP however, the following sections of the Critical Area Ordinance do not apply: • BMC 20.14.145(d) Exemptions for Forest Practices; • BMC 20.14.145(f) Exemptions for activities within improved Right -of -Way; • BMC 20.14.155 Reasonable Use Exception; •NCz l .200 Definition of "Alet Page 20 of 28 Attachment I seef:e Ratio*mitigation Weiland GategE)F�` Eiietion D„ esta .lisli .,,n Rehabilitation Efir[ 04Y on r ft�r 4-549-1 O --J GO S4nl LagOORSGate � r'rr J 34 O --J z—. i -2-.4-r. i -eri Gategofy4V1.5:1 ^^^^`` G O --J E s Gft�egofy lip -A4 4W- 451 165' N�4 Gatego.- -40Y i'YtA _N_�A i'YtA (e) MleflaHd b ' standaf:ds shall s"et:sede these established in the Gtitieal At:ea Of4iflaftee 1 I � Weiland GategE)F�` Eiietion D„ esta .lisli .,,n Rehabilitation Efir[ 04Y gefH &4 44 r'rr J 34 i`ft�e gef1 --ri r J z—. i -2-.4-r. i -eri Gategofy4V1.5:1 1 1 I � 1 01 !�Jllji 111 Ell Page 21 of 28 Attachment I WAhLShoreline Buffers and Setbacks: (1) The following table defines required buffers and setbacks for Type S waters. Buffers and setbacks for all other non -shoreline waters (Type F, Type NP, and Type Ns) are defined in BMC 20.14.730(d), Table LsffpeF ede h uff r& ara (BM -,- 20.14.730(d)) as follows -.L DESIGNATION Minimum Building Buffer Width Setback Standard URBAN CONSERVANCY 15 feet beyond 175 feet buffer SINGLE FAMILY & MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Lot depth less than 125' 5 feet beyond 20% of lot buffer depth Lot depth 125' to 199" 10 feet beyond 20% of lot buffer depth Lot depth greater than 200' 30% of lot 15 feet beyond depth buffer (Maximum of 100') RECREATIONAL 15 feet beyond 100 feet buffer COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL/ DOWNTOWN 15 feet beyond 50 feet WATERFRONT buffer ISOLATED None None 1. Please note: For all designations, setbacks and buffers listed above the following shall apply: a. Where lot depth is less than 150 feet on Commercial or Recreational lots, the buffers listed above may be reduced to 20% of the lot depth. b. In no case shall a buffer be less than 10' or greater than 100' in the Shoreline Residential Designation. c. Buffers are measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark. (2) Buffers and Associated Building Setback Areas: The distance of the buffer shall be measured from the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Buffers shall remain undisturbed natural beach or vegetation areas except where the buffer can be enhanced to improve its functional attributes, as approved by the Department. Buffers shall be maintained along the perimeter of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas, as outlined in the table above. Refuse, garbage, or debris shall not be placed in the buffers or on the beach. (3) Determining Lot Depth: Areas inundated with water are not included in the calculation for lot depth, therefore the measurement may be taken from the OHWM. For lots with varying lot depth, the average depth may be used. Page 22 of 28 Attachment I (4) Habitat Management Plans: The provisions of the Critical Area Ordinance (BMC 20.14.740) relating to Habitat Management Plans may reduce the width of a shoreline buffer to no less than ten (10) feet provided enhancement features are installed that will provide a greater habitat function than the prescribed buffer would. (5) Setback and Buffer Averaging: The Director may grant modifications to the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Area buffer and setbacks required provided: (i) Sixty (60%) percent or more of like structures along the shoreline within the same numbered block as the subject property are setback less than the required buffer/setback required by the SMP. The average of the like structures may be used as a modified buffer for the proposal; and (ii) In addition to the buffer, a minimum of a 5' setback shall be required for the structure; and (iii) No new structure may have a buffer of less than ten (10') feet. (6) Fences: Fences are allowed to be erected in the side yard abutting the fish and wildlife conservation area buffer, but are prohibited within the buffer. Fences may also be erected upland of the buffer including within the shoreline setback area. General development standards for fences are located in BMC 20.44.020. Guardrails may be erected in association with pedestrian access areas provided they do not function as a fence and comply with the International Building Code. (d) Exemptions: The following development activities are not subject to fish and wildlife habitat area buffers and setbacks, provided they are constructed and maintained in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on shoreline ecological functions, and further provided that they comply with all the applicable regulations in BMC Title 20 and this Program: (1) Those portions of an approved water -oriented development that require a location waterward of the ordinary high water mark, and/or within their associated buffers and setbacks; (2) Development activities on lots that are physically and functionally separated from shoreline by an improved paved public or private road or railroad or similar facility and/or by one or more existing developed lots under separate ownership such that the ecological functions provided by buffers do not occur. This provision shall not apply to such a facility within a development proposal or contiguous ownership that can be feasibly relocated to accommodate buffers. (3) Underground utilities; (4) Modifications to existing development that are necessary to comply with environmental requirements of any agency when otherwise consistent with this Program, provided that the City determines that: Page 23 of 28 Attachment I (i) The facility cannot meet the dimensional standard and accomplish the purpose for which it is intended; and (ii) The facility is located, designed, and constructed to meet specified dimensional standards to the maximum extent feasible; and (iii) The modification is in conformance with the provisions for non -conforming development and uses. (5) Roads, railways, and other essential public facilities that must cross shorelines and are necessary to access approved water -dependent development uses are subject to development standards in Chapter 8, section 090. (6) Stairs, ADA ramps, and walkways not greater than 5 feet in width or 18 inches in height above grade, not including railings. (7) Shared moorages shall not be subject to side yard setbacks when located on or adjacent to a property line shared in common by the project proponents and where appropriate easements or other legal instruments have been executed providing for ingress and egress to the facility Page 24 of 28 Attachment I 7.090 Use Matrix and Height Table: (a) Use Matrix: The table determines which shoreline modifications and shoreline uses are allowed or prohibited in each Shoreline Designation. (1) Except for the land uses prohibited in this table, land uses allowed in the underlying zoning are allowed in the Master Program, subject to the preference for water -oriented uses and subject to specific criteria for uses included in these regulations. This chart is not exhaustive of all uses addressed in the zoning code. When referring to unlisted uses, the code is referring neither to uses listed here nor in the zoning code. If a use is prohibited in the underlying zoning district, it is also prohibited within the shoreline. (2) Aquatic Uses are determined by the adjacent Designation and are limited to water -dependent uses and public access. (3) Land uses in the underlying zoning that require a Conditional Use Permit, require a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. (4) Land uses are defined in BMC 20.42 the definitions section of the zoning code. Shoreline activities are defined in the definitions section of this code. (5) A use located within the "Isolated" designation shall not be governed by the performance standards within SMP Chapter 7, General Standards and Regulations; Chapter 8, Shoreline Use Regulations, or Chapter 9 Shoreline Modifications, however the Director may determine the proposed development or use is clearly contrary to the intent of this program, and relevant elements of this program may be applied. Development and land use within this designation shall be governed by all other regulations of BMC Title 20 Land Use. The mandatory permit and procedural requirements of this program contained in Chapter 5, Permit Administration, shall apply to said development or uses. KEY: ct CG X= Prohibited o P= Permitted CU= Conditional Use Cd a O Cd cp CG v U w ; o Cd Z3 o o vi U Unlisted Uses: I CU ICU CU CU I CU CU CU UPLAND USES Boat Sales, Storage and Repair X X X CU P P P Commercial uses such as but not limited to: general retail, general office, clinics, restaurants, drinking places, personal services athletic fields, restaurants, community X X X X P P P facilities, and entertainment uses. (See Zoning Code for specific allowed uses by zone) Page 25 of 28 Attachment I KEY: Ed —Cd X= Prohibited o P= Permitted CU= Conditional Use Cd O Cd C p v Cd v� U Community, Cultural, Educational Facilities CU P P P P P X Golf Courses X CU CU X X X X Hotels and Lodging X X X X P P X Industrial X X X X X X P Worship and Religious Facilities X CU P CU P P X PARKING & UTILITIES Parking Serving Primary Use Within the Shoreline Jurisdiction P P P P P P P Parking Not Serving Primary Use Within the Shoreline Jurisdiction X X X X CU CU CU Transportation facilities that serve uses within the shoreline P P P P P P P Utilities that serve uses within the shoreline P P P P P P P RESIDENTIAL Adult Family Homes, Daycare, & Bed and Breakfasts CU P P X P P X Commercial/Residential mixed X X X X P P X Multi -Family Residential X X P X P P X Single Family Residential P P P XP XP P X SHORELINE MODIFICATIONS (All uses must meet applicable code criteria see Ch. 9) Boat Launch CU CU CU CU CU CU CU Aquaculture (including commercial, non- commercial, and geoduck) CU X X CU CU CU CU Ecological Restoration / Enhancement P P P P P P P Docks, Piers and Other In -Water Structures P P P P P P P Dredging P P P P P P P Flood Hazard Reduction P P P P P P P Mooring Buoys P P P P P P P Marinas CU CU CU CU CU CU CU Stabilization - New and Replacement P P P P P P P Stormwater Management Facilities P P P P P P P RECREATION AND PUBLIC ACCESS Recreation, Non -Water -Oriented CU CU CU CU CU CU CU Recreation, Water -Oriented P P P P P P P Trails, public pedestrian and bicycle not P P P P P P P Page 26 of 28 Attachment I KEY: ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION Ed —Cd 35 feet Downtown Waterfront 175 feet Industrial X= Prohibited Multi -Family Residential 40 feet Over -Water Structures (All Designations) 15 feet Recreation o Single Family Residential P= Permitted Urban Conservancy 25 feet Table Notes: The height limit is restricted to that portion of the building physically located within the shoreline jurisdiction. CU= Conditional Use Cd O Cd C p v Cd vi U including overwater trails OUTRIGHTLY PROHIBITED USES Adult Entertainment X X X X X X X Agriculture X X X X X X X Automobile Sales Service & Repair X X X X X X X Figure 7.090 (b) Height Restrictions: Table 7.090(b) ENVIRONMENT DESIGNATION HEIGHT Commercial 35 feet Downtown Waterfront 175 feet Industrial 35 feet Multi -Family Residential 40 feet Over -Water Structures (All Designations) 15 feet Recreation 35 feet Single Family Residential 30 -35' feet Urban Conservancy 25 feet Table Notes: The height limit is restricted to that portion of the building physically located within the shoreline jurisdiction. This table establishes the allowable height in each designation based on the type of use. All the applicable City standards still apply. In the event the provisions of this Program conflict with provisions of other regulations, the more restrictive shall prevail. Height measurement is defined in Chapter 3. (a) Heights in the commercial & industrial districts may be increased to the zoning district height limit through a Conditional Use Permit provided: (1) The increase does not substantially block views from upland residential properties; (2) Greater height is demonstrated to be needed for an essential element of an allowed use. (3) The project may be required to include compensating elements that substantially enhance the visual and physical public access to the shoreline. (4) It is demonstrated that No Net Loss of habitat function will be achieved. Page 27 of 28 Attachment I (b) Single Family Residential heights may be increased to 35' with the employment of a pitched roof when: (1) The pitch of the roof is not less than 6:12 (2) The pitched roof is oriented perpendicular to the shoreline. Minor gables or other roof features parallel to the shoreline may be permitted on a case by case basis provided such features do not extend past the pitched roof where views are intended to be preserved. (3) The pitched roof covers the entire structure. Page 28 of 28 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Mutual Aid Agreement for the Provision of Fire Protection & Emergency Medical Services Study Session Date: COUNCIL MEETING Date: Department: Presenter: Phone: 7F June 28, 2017 July 5, 2017 Fire Chief David Schmitt (360) 473-5380 SUMMARY: This is an agreement between the City of Bremerton and every fire district/department including Navy Region Northwest to provide mutual aid. The current mutual aid agreements are outdated. The agreements did not define the specific services rendered and are among specific entities. The new consolidated agreement is between all parties and specifically identifies the services rendered and received from each entity. ATTACHMENTS: Mutual Aid Agreement FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): N/A STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ❑x No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: 0 Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Mutual Aid Agreement; and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action N68436-20170601-2066 MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT BETWEEN COMMANDER, NAVY REGION NORTHWEST 1100 Hunley Road, Silverdale, WA 98315 AND CITY OF BREMERTON FIRE DEPARTMENT NORTH KITSAP FIRE AND RESCUE CENTRAL KITSAP FIRE AND RESCUE SOUTH KITSAP FIRE AND RESCUE BAINBRIDGE ISLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT POULSBO FIRE, DISTRICT 18 KITSAP COUNTY, OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES COMNAVREG NW 7050 Ser N8/ This agreement, entered into this XX day of Month YYYY, by and between Commander, Navy Region Northwest (COMNAVREG NW), on behalf of Commanding Officer, Naval Base Kitsap (NBK), Bremerton Fire Department, North Kitsap Fire and Rescue, Central Kitsap Fire and Rescue, South Kitsap Fire and Rescue, Bainbridge Island Fire Department, Poulsbo Fire District 18, and Kitsap County Office Of The Fire Marshal, (hereinafter, "Kitsap County Fire Protection Agencies") acting pursuant to the authority of 42 U.S.C. § 1856a, DoDI 6055.06, and OPNAVINST 11320.23G, is for the purpose of providing the benefits of mutual aid to the other entity, for the protection of life and property from wild land fires, as well as firefighting and fire suppression support. The anticipated support includes; but is not limited to; emergency services of basic medical support, basic and advanced life support, hazardous material containment and confinement, and special rescue events involving vehicular and water mishaps, and trench, building and confined space extractions. It is the policy of the Department of the Navy and COMNAVREG NW to enter into Mutual Aid Agreements (MAA) with non-federal fire departments located in the vicinity of naval installations whenever practicable. The parties have mutually concluded that it is desirable, practicable, and beneficial for the parties to enter into this MAA to document their willingness and ability to render assistance to one another in order to enhance the safety and security of the civilian community and naval facilities. FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Hereinafter, the term "COMNAVREG NW Fire and Emergency Services (F&ES)" refers specifically to the F&ES organization located on and servicing NBK. It is agreed that: 1. Upon request from Kitsap County Fire Protection Agencies, firefighting equipment and personnel of COMNAVREG NW F&ES will be dispatched; subject to operational requirements and resource availability; to any location within the area for which the Kitsap County Fire Protection Agencies are responsible to provide fire protection and emergency medical services. 2. Upon request from the COMNAVREG NW F&ES, firefighting equipment and personnel of the Kitsap County Fire Protection Agencies will be dispatched; subject to operational requirements and resource availability; to any location within the area for which COMNAVREG NW F&ES is responsible to provide fire protection and emergency medical services. 3. The party receiving a request for assistance shall endeavor to immediately inform the requesting party if assistance can or cannot be provided, and the type and quantity of resources available for dispatch. 4. Neither party shall hold the other party liable or at fault for being unable to respond to a request for assistance nor being able to respond in a timely manner, or responding with less than optimum equipment/personnel, as the parties understand that each is primarily and ultimately responsible for providing fire suppression and hazardous material incident response within their own jurisdictions. 5. The requesting and rendering of assistance under the terms of this MAA shall be per detailed operational plans and procedures developed by the individual parties. All parties shall work together to implement such plans and procedures in a manner compatible with their respective operational authorities. It is understood that the rendering of assistance under the terms of this MAA is not mandatory. 6. Under the authority of 15 U.S.C. § 2210 and 44 C.F.R § 151, Kitsap County Fire Protection Agencies are permitted to seek reimbursement for direct expenses and losses (defined as additional firefighting costs over normal operational costs) incurred in fighting fires on property under the jurisdiction of the United States Government. 2 N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES 7. Under the authority of 42 U.S.C. § 1856a, either party may seek reimbursement from the other for the costs incurred by it in providing services to the other party in response to a request for assistance. Further, all parties agree to waive all claims against every other party for compensation for any loss, damage, personal injury, or death occurring in consequence of the performance of this agreement. 8. All equipment used by any party in carrying out this agreement will; at the time of action; be owned by it. All personnel acting under this agreement will; at the time of such action; be an employee or volunteer member of the party. 9. Any dispatch of equipment and personnel pursuant to this agreement is subject to the following conditions: a. Any request for aid shall include the amount and type of equipment and personnel requested and specify the location where the equipment and personnel are to be dispatched. b. Upon receipt of a request for assistance, equipment and personnel will be immediately dispatched along with instructions as to their mission, use, and deployment in quantities and amounts that can be provided without jeopardizing the mission of the fire department providing the resources, per the judgment of the senior officer of the responding party. C. The senior officer of the requesting fire department shall normally assume full charge of the operations at the scene of the fire or other emergency. However, under procedures agreed to by the heads of the fire departments involved, a senior officer of a fire department furnishing assistance may assume responsibility for the coordination of the overall operations at the scene of the fire or emergency. d. A responding fire department shall be released by the requesting party when the services are no longer required or when the responding fire department is needed in its own jurisdiction. 10. Training: a. Whenever either party hosts fire protection training for its own personnel (host department) it may; to the maximum extent practicable and subject to its sole discretion; offer the training to personnel of the other party (guest department). Training will be provided on a space available basis only. 3 N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES b. The host department will not charge the guest department for training coursework provided pursuant to this MAA unless there is a cost that cannot be covered by the host department, such as an individual student fee/tuition or cost of a certificate. C. The guest department or its personnel will be responsible for the payment of any and all logistic costs necessary to attend training provided by the host department, including; but not limited to; lodging, meals, and travel expenses. d. This MAA is entered into voluntarily by the parties with no obligation on their part to either provide training or to participate in any offered training. e. The guest department is responsible for ensuring that its personnel observe all rules, regulations, and guidelines for training provided by the host department. Neither party shall hold another party liable or at fault for damage or injury incurred during joint training activities. f. The host department reserves the right to deny training to any guest department personnel who do not meet the prerequisites necessary to attend the offered training. 11. Execution of this Agreement: a. This MAA shall become effective upon the date annotated above, and shall remain in full force and effect for a period not to exceed five (5) years, or until cancelled by mutual agreement of the parties, or upon the provision of at least sixty (60) days advance written notice from the party desiring to terminate this agreement to the other. b. Following the 5 years, the agreement will either automatically terminate or be renegotiated. I N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES 12. Signatures: North Kitsap Fire & Rescue: GILLIAN GREGORY Board Chair STEVEN NEUPERT Commissioner PATRICK PEARSON Commissioner Date FERNANDO ESPINOSA Date Commissioner Date WILSON STEWART Commissioner Date CINDY MORAN District Secretary Date Date 5 N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Central Kitsap Fire & Rescue: DICK WEST Board Chair NATE ANDREWS Commissioner BOB MUHLEMAN Commissioner Date KEN ERICKSON Commissioner Date DAVE FERGUS Commissioner Date KENNETH BAGWELL District Secretary 0 Date Date Date N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES South Kitsap Fire & Rescue: MIKE ESLAVA Board Chair DUSTY WILEY Commissioner DAVE GELSLEICHTER Commissioner Date GERALD PREUSS Commissioner Date PAUL GOLNIK Commissioner Date KENNETH BAGWELL District Secretary 7 Date Date Date N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Bainbridge Island Fire Department: SCOTT ISENMAN Board Chair Date YONGSUK CHO Commissioner BRUCE ALWARD Date FRITZ VON IBSCH Commissioner Commissioner TIM CAREY Date Commissioner 11 Date Date N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Poulsbo Fire Department: MARTIN SULLIVAN Board Chair DARRYL MILTON Commissioner JAMES INGALLS Commissioner Date DAVID ELLINGSON Date Commissioner Date CONRAD GREEN Commissioner Date LISE ALKIRE District Secretary 0 Date Date N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Kitsap County: ROBERT GELDER Commissioner EDWARD E. WOLF Commissioner Date CHARLOTTE GARRIDO Date Commissioner Date DANA DANIELS TINA R. ROBINSON Kitsap County Prosecutor 10 Date Date N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Kitsap County Office of the Fire Marshall: DAVID LYMAN Fire Marshall Date XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (Title) Date 11 N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES City Of Bremerton: PATTY LENT Date SHANNON L. CORIN Mayor City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH Date City Attorney 12 Date N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Commander, Navy Region Northwest EDWARD SCHRADER, CAPT, USN Date A. P. VERHOFSTADT, P.E. Date Commanding Officer Executive Director Naval Base Kitsap Commander, Navy Region Northwest 13 N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Points of Contact Commander, Navy Region Northwest: a. Fire Chief Kurt Waeschle (360) 396-0135, kurt.waeschle@navy.mil b. Regional Support Agreement Manager Mussetta Enos (360) 396-1935, Mussetta.enos@navy.mil North Kitsap Fire and Rescue: a. Fire Chief, Dan Smith (360) 297-3619, smith@nkfr.org b. Assistant Chief, Richard Lagrandeur (360) 297-3619, lagrandeur@nkfr.org Central Kitsap Fire and Rescue: a. Fire Chief Scott Weninger (360) 447-3556, sweninger@ckfr.orq b. Deputy Chief John Oliver (360) 447-3566, joliver@ckfr.org City of Bremerton: a. Fire Chief David Schmitt (360) 473-5381, david.schmitt@ci.bremerton.wa.us Bainbridge Island Fire Department: a. Fire Chief Hank Teran (206) 451-2032, hteran@bifd.o b. Finance Manager Ed Kaufman (206) 451-2037, ekaufman@bifd.org South Kitsap Fire and Rescue: a. Fire Chief Stephen Wright (360) 895-6501, SWright@skfr.or Poulsbo Fire District 18: a. Fire Chief Jeffrey Griffin 14 N68436-20170601-2066 FOR THE PROVISION OF FIRE PROTECTION AND EMERGENCY SERVICES (360) 516-8813, jgriffin@poulsbofire.org b. Deputy Chief Bruce Peterson (360) 535-2510, bpeterson@poulsbofire.org Kitsap County Office of the Fire Marshall: a. Fire Marshall David Lyman (360) 337-5777, DLynam@co.kitsap.wa.us 15 N68436-20170601-2066 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Professional Services Agreement with the Bremerton School District for a full-time School Resource Officer 7G Study Session Date: June 28, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Julv 5. 2017 Department: Presenter: Phone: Police Steven Strachan (360) 473-5224 SUMMARY: Provide a full-time School Resource Officer to work with the District and building administrators to provide a positive, safe environment for students and employees in 2017 and 2018. ATTACHMENTS: Professional Services Agreement with the Bremerton School District FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The Bremerton School District will pay the City $61,500 to offset the costs of the program for 2017, and $70,500 for 2018. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: 0 No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑x Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Professional Services Agreement with the Bremerton School District for a full- time School Resource Officer; and to authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2018 The City of Bremerton ("City") and the Bremerton School District 100-C ("District"), referred to collectively as the "Parties," enter into the following Agreement for security services: L Scope: The City will provide a full-time School Resource Officer (SRO) to assist faculty, staff, students, and families within the Bremerton School District. The SRO's primary service areas will be Bremerton High School and Mountain View Middle School. Assistance at other Bremerton Schools will be provided as requested. The SRO will assume regular police duties outside of the scheduled academic calendar. The SRO, along with the Chief of Police or his designee, will work with the District and building administrators to provide a positive, safe environment for students and employees. City officials will work with the District to plan and carry out in -services for staff which will help staff learn to identify safety risks and learn appropriate responses in unsafe situations. The SRO will work with individual students and groups of students to encourage positive behavioral choices. The SRO will at all times follow the procedures laid out by building principals. District and SRO will work closely to plan and implement specific activities designed to improve student behavioral choices at each site. All parties agree to meet together on a regularly scheduled basis. II. Term: This Agreement shall be effective January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2018. III. Compensation: In consideration of the services provided pursuant to this Agreement, the District shall pay the City of Bremerton Treasurer Sixty-one Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($61,500) in total for the calendar year of services for 2017. The District shall make payments of Forty-one Thousand Dollars ($41,000) on or before April 30, 2017 and Twenty Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($20,500) on or before September 30, 2017. The District shall pay Seventy Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($70,500) for the calendar year of 2018 as follows: Forty-eight Thousand Dollars ($48,000) on or before January 30th 2018 and Twenty-two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($22,500) on or before September 30, 2018. IV. Relationship of Parties: The SRO is an employee of the City of Bremerton Police Department and will answer to the Police Chief. V. Entire Agreement: This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties, and the Parties acknowledge that there are no other agreements, written or oral, that have not been set forth in the text of this Agreement. School Resource Officer Page 1 of 3 VI. Nondiscrimination: The Parties shall not discriminate in employment or services to the public on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, marital status, sexual orientation or disability. VII. Termination: This Agreement may be terminated without cause at any time by mutual agreement of the parties hereto, or by either party after 30 days following the other party's receipt of a written intent to terminate. Each party shall have the right to cancel and immediately terminate this Agreement without prior notice upon breach of the Agreement by the other party. VIII. Indemnification: The School District shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents and employees, or any of them, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses and damages of any nature whatsoever, arising out of any act or omission of the School District, its officers, agents, and employees or any of them relating to or arising out of the performance of the Agreement; however, the School District shall not defend, indemnify or hold the City harmless from any claims, actions or suits for injury, damage or loss of any kind caused by either intentional act(s) or the sole negligence of the City, its officers, agents and employees, or any of them. In any action for which the School District defends the City, the School District shall have the right to select counsel; however, the City may associate additional counsel at the City's own expense. If final judgment be rendered against the City and the School District and their respective officers, agents and employees, or any of them, the School District shall satisfy the same; however, in the event that the final judgment contains any award for injury, damage or loss of any kind caused by the intentional act(s) or the sole negligence of the City, its officers, agents and employees, or any of them, the City shall pay that portion of the judgment. In executing this Agreement, the City does not assume liability or responsibility for, or in any way release the School District from any liability or responsibility which arises in whole or in part from the existence or effect of School District policies, rules or regulations. If any cause, claim, suit, action, or administrative proceeding is commenced, in which the enforceability and/or validity of any such School District policy, rule or regulation is at issue, the School District shall defend the same at its sole expense and if judgment is entered or damages are awarded against the School District, the City or both, the School District shall satisfy the same, including all chargeable costs and attorney's fees. The City shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the School District and its officers, directors, agents and employees, or any of them from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, expenses and damages of any nature whatsoever, out of any act or omission of the City, its officers, agents and employees, or any of them in the performance of this Agreement; however, the City shall not defend, indemnify or hold the School District harmless from any claims, actions or suits for injury, damage or loss of any kind caused by either intentional act(s) or the sole negligence of the School District, its officers, directors, agents and employees or any of them. In any action for which the City defends the School District, the City shall have the School Resource Officer Page 2 of 3 right to select counsel; however, the School District may associate additional counsel at the School District's own expense. If final judgment contains any award for injury or loss of any kind caused by the intentional act(s) or the sole negligence of the School District, its officers, directors, agents and employees or any of them, the School District shall pay that portion of the judgment. IX. Venue Stipulation: The laws of the State of Washington shall be applicable to the construction and enforcement of this Agreement. Any action at law, suit in equity, or judicial proceeding for the enforcement of this Agreement or any provision herein shall be instituted in Kitsap County, Washington. CITY OF BREMERTON PATTY LENT, Mayor Date Steven Strachan, Police Chief Date APPROVED AS TO FORM: Roger A. Lubovich, City Attorney School Resource Officer Page 3 of 3 Date BREMERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 100-C By: Its: Date Board Member Date AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Purchase of a John Deere 450 KLT Crawler Dozer from Pape Machinery, Inc. of Tacoma, WA for the Forestry Division 7H Study Session Date: June 28, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Julv 5. 2017 Department: Presenter: Phone: PWU/ERR Milenka Hawkins -Bates (360) 473-5333 SUMMARY: The approved 2017 budget shows a replacement in the Forestry Department of a 1989 John Deere 4000 Dozer. The requested replacement is a John Deere 450 KLT Crawler Dozer per NJPA Contract in the amount of $117,924.44 including Washington State sales tax of 9%. The authorized dealer is Pape' Machinery, Inc. of Tacoma, WA. ATTACHMENTS: 1) NJPA Contract Quote No. 032515-JDC; 2) Justification FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Budgeted within the 510 fund at $200,000 STUDY SESSION AGENDA: 0 No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑x Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the purchase of a John Deere 450 KLT Crawler Dozer per NJPA Contract in the amount of $117,924.44 including Washington State sales tax; and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action Pape' Machinery, Inc. 3607 - 20th Street East, Tacoma, WA 98424 (253) 922-8718 (800) 621-7636 fax # (253) 922-3562 TO: CITY OF BREMERTON DATE: May 23, 2017 QTY PROPOSAL AMOUNT 1 NEW JOHN DEERE 450KLT CRAWLER DOZER EQUIPPED AS FOLLOWS: FINAL TIER 4 $112,649.00 ROPS CANOPY WITH HEATER, AIR SUSPENSION SEAT, ADDITIONAL WORK LIGHTS, 97" ALL HYDRAULIC BLADE, 16" SHOES ON SEALED AND LUBRICATED RAILS, ROCK GUARDS, ENGINE PRECLEANER, OIL SAMPLING PORTS, QUICK SERVICE ALL OTHER STANDARD EQUIPMENT NJPA CONTRACT # 032515-3DC 30% OFF LIST PRICE ($33,794.70) FACTORY FREIGHT AND DELIVERY TO BREMERTON SHOP $2,950.00 PRE DELIVERY AND 500 HOUR SERVICE $1,750.00 REAR SCREEN $942.00 NJPA FEE $1,126.49 OPTIONS 1 REAR RIPPER 5 POCKET 5 SHANK ADD $7,635.60 $7,635.60 1 PIN AND BRUSH RAKE INSTALLED ADD $5,275 $5,275.00 1 CAB WITH AC ADD $10,366.30 $10,366.30 1 JOHN DEERE 4000 SERIES WINCH POWER IN FREE SPOOL OUT ADD $13,051.50 $0.00 Sub Total: $108,899.69 RENTAL INVOICES without tax: Finance Options: (OAC, $500.00 Document fee) SALES TAX if applicable: 1 9.0% $9,024.75 CASH DOWN: $0.00 RENTAL INTEREST CHARGE: $0.00 F.E.T. $0.00 PAYOFF: $0.00 DOC FEE: $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL: $117,924.44 ENTER OUR ORDER FOR THE ABOVE: Purchaser Signature Title Date Conditions: Prices subject to change. Proposal subject to Management Approval. CHAD LANGIS TERRITORY MANAGER Manager Annroval O 00 a aD E c� aD U 0 70 z0 L M C O o U Q N � � V NC) }' � N H U co LL C 0 LO ' ) Q N v Q O ++ N Q to V s O C) i V 00 W a d LO N � a � o 00Q �0 m o U C E y i y N OCL m W ? O D • r ' Ci L Ur Z N 2 O (D mO coo Q M Ike 00 LL N 0 U 0 � o � N � U W LU QLami H O m cn s Lc).. 00 -• D ILL Cl) H o AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON 71 CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Agreement with Golden Eagle Study Session Date: June 28, 2017 Evergreens for the Removal and Sale of COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 5, 2017 Minor Forest Products Department: PW&U/Forestry Presenter: Pat Coxon Phone: (360)473-5448 SUMMARY: The current agreement with Golden Eagle Evergreens for the removal and sale of Minor Forest Products expires in June 2017, and a new agreement needs to be in place. The Forestry Division has negotiated directly with Golden Eagle Evergreens for the removal and sale of Minor Forest Products, as they have proven to be the most careful and skilled at what they do. Because the watershed is a unique and sensitive property, it is in the best interest of the City to negotiate directly with the company that has proven their skill and respect for the nature of the property. Staff believes that the proposed prices Golden Eagle will pay the City under this agreement are substantially consistent with fair market value. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Director Memorandum; 2) Agreement FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): $25,000 minimum annual payment to the City. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: 0 No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑x Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the agreement for the removal and sale of Minor Forest Products with Golden Eagle Evergreens; and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action June 6, 2017 Director Memorandum Re: Sole Source Procurement, Minor Forest Products The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a written finding for utilizing sole source procurement methodology for minor forest products harvesting and trimming. This is a unique service and involves the City's watershed, which is a sensitive area. The City will sell minor forest products under the agreement, but will also receive a service. The purpose of the "minor forest product" removal is the overall health of the forest and fire prevention. The City has used Golden Eagle and other contractors in the past. Golden Eagle has proven to be the most careful and skilled. Because the watershed is a unique and sensitive property, it is in the best interest of the City to negotiate directly with the company that has proven its skill and respect for the nature of the property. We believe that the proposed prices Golden Eagle will pay the City under this agreement are substantially consistent with fair market value. For instance, the DNR currently receives $0.08 per pound for cedar boughs, $0.06 per pound for white pine boughs, and $0.04 per pound for Douglas fir boughs. This contract pays $0.08 per pound for pine and cedar boughs and $0.04 for Douglas fir. The City may terminate this agreement at any time if circumstances change, with thirty days' notice. Z Chal A Martin, P.E. Director Public Works & Utilities 1 100 Oyster Bay Ave. N., Bremerton, WA 98312 * Phone (360) 473-5920 * Fax (360) 473-2330 Working for and with our residents to establish Bremerton as Puget Sound's most beautiful and livable waterfront cityl AGREEMENT FOR THE REMOVAL AND SALE OF MINOR FOREST PRODUCTS This is an agreement for the sale of minor forest products ("Agreement") made and entered into this day of 2017, by and between the City of Bremerton, hereinafter "City" and Golden Eagle Evergreens, hereinafter "Contractor", each referred to as a "Party" and collectively as "Parties". WHEREAS, the purpose of this Agreement is to provide harvest and sale of salal and huckleberry brush, Western White Pine and Western Red Cedar boughs, and other secondary forest products ("minor forest products") from selected Bremerton Water Utility lands to the Contractor, and to meet that purpose, the City grants permission to the Contractor to enter upon certain property owned by the City as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof for the Iimited purpose of harvesting these minor forest products; and WHEREAS, the removal of minor forest products is important to the health of the forest and aids in fire prevention. In addition, the sale of the minor forest products provides a source of income for the City; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions contained therein, and attached and incorporated and made a part thereof, the City and Contractor mutually agree that the Contractor shall provide harvest and payment for minor forest products to the City as follows: I. Scope. Contractor shall provide all performance of work for minor forest products harvest, marketing, and payment for harvested volume to the City, including all labor, materials, transportation, equipment, supplies, and services necessary for and reasonably incidental to the completion of all work as set out in the scope of work, which is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. Il. Term. The tern of this Agreement commences on July 1, 2017 and terminates on June 30, 2020, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section X of this Agreement. Upon expiration of the term, the Parties may agree to extend the Agreement for three (3) years, with substantially the same terms and conditions except those set forth in Exhibit C, which may be negotiated based on fair market value. III. Payment. The Contractor agrees to pay the City according to the terms and at a time and in a manner provided for in the payment schedule attached as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference. The payment schedule contained in Exhibit C may be periodically modified by mutual consent of the Parties based on market and harvest conditions. The Contractor shall make its harvest volume records available for inspection upon written request of the City. IV. Relationship of Parties: Contractor represents that it is skilled in the matters addressed in the Scope of Work and is performing independent functions and responsibilities within its field of expertise. Contractor and its personnel are independent contractors and not employees of the City. Contractor and its personnel have no authority to bind the City or to control the City's employees and other Contractors. None of the benefits provided by the City to its employees, including, but not Iimited to, compensation, insurance, and unemployment insurance are available from the City to the employees, agents, representatives, or sub -contractors of the Contractor. Contractor will be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Contractor's agents, employees, representatives and sub -contractors during the performance of this Agreement. The City may, during the term of this Agreement, engage other independent contractors to perform the same or similar work. As an independent contractor, Contractor is responsible for its own management. The City's administration and enforcement of this Agreement shall not be deemed an exercise of managerial control over Contractor or its personnel. V. Licenses & Taxes. Contractor shall possess a current Bremerton Business License and regulatory licenses required to fulfil Contractor's obligations under this Agreement. As an independent contractor, Contractor is responsible for payment of all taxes and licensing fees necessary to perform its obligations under this Agreement. These taxes and fees include but are not limited to State industrial insurance, Business & Occupation, State professional licensing, and City business licensing. If any taxes or fees due the City have been declared delinquent, the City may withhold the delinquent amount, plus any additional charges arising from the delinquency, from any payments due Contractor. VI. Indemnification. Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement, except for that portion of the injuries and damages caused by the City's sole negligence. The City's review or acceptance of any of the work when completed shall not be grounds to avoid any of these covenants of indemnification. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Contractor and the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the Contractor's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Contractor's negligence. IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE CONTRACTOR'S WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE_ TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER. VII. Insurance: The Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees, sub -consultants or sub -contractors. Before beginning work on the project described in this Agreement, the Contractor shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing: Automobile Liabilitv insurance with limits no less than $I,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and Commercial General Liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single Iimit per occurrence and general aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be limited to: blanket contractual; products/completed operationstbroad form property damage; explosion, collapse and underground (XCU) if applicable; and employer's liability; and Worker's Compensation insurance as statutorily required by the Industrial Insurance Act, Title 51 Revised Code of Washington, and employer's liability with limits not less than $1,000,000. Any payment of deductible or self-insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor. All required policies shall be provided on an "occurrence" basis except professional liability insurance (if required), which may be provided on a "claims -made" basis. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy, as respects work performed by or on behalf of the Contractor and a copy of an endorsement that is acceptable to the City, which names the City as an additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The City reserves the right to receive a certified copy of all the required insurance policies and endorsements. The City further reserves the right to reject any unacceptable policies and/or endorsements. The Contractor's Commercial General Liability insurance shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer's liability. The Contractor's insurance shall be primary and non-contributory insurance as respects the City and shall contain a waiver of subrogation against the City for claims arising out of any operations, liabilities and obligations to which coverage applies. It shall be an affirmative obligation upon Contractor to advise the City's Risk Manager by fax at (360) 473-5161, or by certified mail, return receipt requested to City of Bremerton, attn: Risk Management, 345 6`h Street, Bremerton, WA 98337 within two days of the cancellation, suspension or substantive change of any insurance policy set out herein, and failure to do so shall be construed to be a breach of contract. The City also reserves its unqualified right to require at any time and for any reason, proof of coverage in the form of a duplicate of the insurance policy with all endorsements as evidence of coverage. VIII. General Conditions: A. Entry Exceptions. No entry shall be allowed in the vicinity of water intakes, wellhead protection zones, or the Bremerton Police Range, see Exhibit A, unless authorized by the Forestry stab. No entry shall be allowed during Industrial Fire Precaution Levels (IFPLs) of III or higher. No entry shall be allowed during a High Threat Level as issued by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Contractor shall be responsible for checking the status of the above entry levels. No entry shall be allowed during inclement weather when vehicular travel on forest roads has the potential for damaging roads or streams. Access. Contractor is allowed entry for the above express purpose only and is allowed ingress and egress to specified work locations only by the most direct route. Harvesting and removal operations shall not cause damage to water courses, soils, roads, standing timber or reforested areas. No cedar products, other than boughs, or other merchantable material other than those specifically named, shall be cut or taken. Fire Precautions. No smoking on Water Utility forest lands during the closed season as defined by State of Washington regulations. No open fires at any time. All other closed season regulations as defined by the State of Washington regulations that pertain to this operation shall be observed. Firearms. No firearms are allowed in Contractor's possession or in Contractor's vehicle($) while on Water Utility lands. B. Reports & Infgrmation. When requested by the City, Contractor shall furnish periodic reports and documents on matters covered by this Agreement. The reports and documents shall be furnished in the time and form requested. Contractor shall maintain accounting records in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). C. Entire Agreement This Agreement and its Exhibits constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties, and the Parties acknowledge that there are no other agreements, written or oral, that have not been set forth in the text of this Agreement. D. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be found void, the balance of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. E. Mod'ficnt'an. This Agreement may only be modified by written instrument signed by both Parties. nNWSUVI ►{1,. All communications regarding this Agreement shall be sent to the Parties at the addresses listed below by registered or 1st class mail, or by personal service, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to the addressee at the address stated in this Agreement or such other address as may be hereafter specified in writing. City Address: Forestry Division Manager Bremerton Public Works & Utilities 1600 Oyster Bay Ave. S, Bremerton, WA 98312 Contractor Address: I.E.F. Corporation Golden Eagle Evergreens 870 W. Golden Pheasant Rd. Shelton, WA 98584 IX. Nondiscrimination: Contractor shall not discriminate in employment or services to the public on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, marital status, or disability, or sexual orientation except for employment actions based on bona fied occupational qualification. X. Termination: This Agreement shall remain in force until completion and acceptance of the services, terminated by written instrument upon mutual consent, or by either Party for convenience or cause with 30 days written notice. Any notice by Contractor shall include a report showing the status of all items listed in the Scope of Work current through the termination date. CITY OF BREMERTON By: its: Date: Approved as to form: CONTRACTOR By: its: Date: Attest: Bremerton City Attorney City Clerk 0 V a Ea�� �,r m` X G LCL v� Z3 00 9 9 0 s m S a a" S v ui v a 3 1=®AIIIA r N , 0 a M osu to . y cocm r aS kfi CD N D L�0 cn O N H o N 4� �dcrpp f V o .y sy o 0 Is soo-> oovs O N O LO r � N n � M N N M M Q g vi o r N N N M un co r 0I T ca cq r M EXHIBIT B SCOPE OF WORK 1. Permittee shall not disturb, hinder, interfere in or otherwise inhibit the operations of the City of Bremerton. The City of Bremerton reserves for itself the right to make any use of Property entered by Permittee. 2. Prior to entering upon the Property, Permittee shall obtain a Specialized Forest Products Harvesting Permit from the State of Washington and provide a copy to the City of Bremerton. Any person entering the Property shall be required to carry a copy of the Permit on his/her person at all times while on the Property. 3. Permittee shall not build any fire on the Property or on any other City of Bremerton property and shall report any fire or signs of fire seen while on any City of Bremerton property. Permittee shall use reasonable efforts to suppress any fire that is non -threatening. 4. General Rules and Regulations: (a) Harvesting and removing secondary forest products is allowed only during daylight hours. (b) City of Bremerton access permit must be displayed on the dash in aII authorized vehicles. (c) All gates must be kept locked upon entering and leaving Property. (d) Permittee agrees to report any illegal, unauthorized, or suspicious activities that they find on the Property to Forestry Manager or a City of Bremerton representative. (e) All vehicles must stay on existing roads, as shown on map (Exhibit A) and vehicles shall not pass `road closed' signs. (f) Access onto City of Bremerton Property is only allowed for the purpose of harvesting brush/bough/other secondary forest products as agreed to by both parties, and no other activities , (g) Harvesters must wear bright orange hats or vests during hunting season. 6. Permittee shall obtain all governmental approvals, licenses, and permits required in connection with the Permitted Activities. 7. Alterations and Maintenance. Permittee shall maintain the Property in a clean and undamaged state and shall make no alterations to the Property without prior written approval of the City of Bremerton. 8. Title and risk of loss to the specialized forest products harvested hereunder shall pass when the products are severed from the s t e m . 9. Signs. Owner shall allow Permittee to erect reasonable signs prohibiting the harvesting by others on the Property and Permittee shall remove said signs upon the termination of this Agreement. Owner shall have the right to review location and size of signs prior to placement. 10. Property Condition and Clean up. Permittee shall be responsible for removal and cleanup of all garbage, debris, and other materials associated with Permittee's use of the Property. At the time of termination or expiration of this Agreement, Permittee shall leave the Property in a neat and clean condition. 11. Owner or its assigns shall have the right to terminate this lease on 30 days notice and pro -rated refund of Agreement fee. EXHIBIT C PAYMENT SCHEDULE I . Agreed payment for salal and huckleberry brush, to be paid to the City of Bremerton is $25,000 per year. This is a required flat fee, not a minimum or maximum. 2. Payment to be made to the City by July 1, 2017 and thereafter by each July 1"during the tern of this Agreement. 3. Agreed payment for Western White Pine and Western Red Cedar boughs, to be paid to the City of Bremerton is 8 cents per pound, and Douglas fir boughs 4 cents per pound. 4. Payment is to be made to the City after boughs are weighed and before end of quarter they were harvested in. 5. Other secondary forest products that maybe harvested, which are agreed upon by both Parties, will be paid at the agreed fair market value to the City of Bremerton. AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Commercial Line Extension Agreement with Puget Sound Energy for Pump Station KL -2 7J Study Session Date: June 28, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Julv 5. 2017 Department: Presenter: PW&U/WWTP Pat Coxon Phone: (360)473-5448 SUMMARY: The current electrical power at Pump Station KL -2 (1976 Price Road) is 480v corner grounded delta, and it needs to be upgraded to a true "Y" 277/480v connection.The existing power is inherently unsafe for staff to work on and has continued to cause motor/pump and generator issues at the station. We requested a proposal from PSE (Puget Sound Energy), and they provided a quote of $39,616.86 to install the new pad mounted transformer and electrical conductors. This electrical upgrade will ensure a much more efficient electrical system and it will be a lot safer to work on. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Puget Sound Energy Quote FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): This electrical upgrade at pump station KL -2 is budgeted through the 2017 WW CIP, and has a budget of $250,000. The total cost for the electrical upgrade is $39,616.86 STUDY SESSION AGENDA: x❑ No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑x Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Commercial Line Extension Agreement with Puget Sound Energy for $39,616.86; and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action DocuSlgn Envelope ID 48FA083A-775D-117A-9E78-3F9B13ASCSA7 PUGET SOUND ENERGY Puget Sound energy PO. Boz 91034 Sellevue, WA 9811(19.9733 F'.com June 13, 2017 Ty Loper City of Bremerton 345 6th St, Ste 600 Bremerton, WA 98337 PSE Order No.: 105084652 Dear Ty Loper Thank you for the opportunity to provide electrical service for your project at 1976 Price Rd, Bremerton We look forward to serving you and your project's energy needs This agreement outlines the costs for performing the needed work per the attached PSE drawing and scope description These costs represent doing the work during normal working hours and exclude trenching and other excavation related work that is your responsibility to provide 3 phase primary underground line extension PROJECT COST BREAKDOWN — LINE EXTENSION Construction Costs $ 0.00 Transformer Charge +50.00 Less. Applicable Margin Allowance _S 0'00 Sub -Total (Eligible for partial refund under certa..n conditions) $0.00 —0) Permitting Fees $327.32 Relocation/removal of existing facilities +$3,670.91 Other Non -Refundable Construction +$ 35,618.63 Other Costs +$0.00 Costs Sub -Total (Non -Refundable Costs) =$39,616.86 (2) Amount to Be Billed tinder This Agreement =$39,616.86 (1+2) Customer Initials PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY SERVICE CHARGES ARE N[1TJNCLUDED IN YOUR LINE EXTENSION Any applicable charges listed below will be billed after your servica line Installation. Current costs effective 09/112015 c„rh rl,nrt..a -0 h. hind .e.. 1..—.w.— o....t c......a r--.. Merl ia.xr M. 0.- c.. ".ae ee Sqrvice Type Base Cos Single wire run to handhole or transformer $54400 Each additional nun of wire(per circuits $126.05 Each additional trip beyond 1 trip due to customer requirements $372.62 per tri Hourly rate for additional engineering $162.54 Underground Temporary Service Charge $18600 Overhead Temporary Service Charge I $248.00 Overhead Permanent Service Charge 1 $694.39 Customer Initials DoouSign Envelope ID- 48FA083A-775D-417A-9E78-3F9B13A5C5A7 All costs are calculated in accordance with Puget Sound Energy's (PSE) Tariff G Rate Schedule 65 "Line Extensions', available at pse.com. This cost information is valid for 90 days from the date of this letter Should we receive your agreement after this period, the costs will be subject to changes The amount noted on this agreement Is an estimated cost. however PSE's Schedule 85 line extension tariff requires customers to pay the actual cost of construction PSE will determine the actual cost of the job once construction is complete. If the actual cost of the job is 10% above or below the estimated cost, an additional billing or refund will result to account for the difference PROJECT CHECKLIST 1. The attached PSE drawing shows the proposed scope of your project including the location of permanent, above ground electrical facilities required to provide electrical service to your project Fault current Information for transformers associated with your project is noted on the work sketch drawing. Please review this drawing as soon as possible to ensure there are no unforeseen conflicts between PSE's design and your project If you determine there are conflicts or if you identify a discrepancy while reviewing the drawing for your project, please contact meat the number below. 2. Additional construction -related information and information on metering and service entrance requirements are provided In PSE's Electric Service handbook for commercial projects. If you would like a copy of the handbook please contact me at the number below It is your responsibility to provide your project manager, site superintendent, andlor subcontractors with any relevant information from this correspondence that apply to their work In support of your project 3. The Excavation Requirements & Final Grade Certification must be signed by the project owner or designee and returned to me along with a signed copy of this letter and your payment. 4. If a project Is developed by a Limited -Liability Companies (LLC), you are required to provide contact information for all managing members in addition to a copy of your Master Business Application. This Information must also be provided prior to commencing construction of your project. 5. Transformers have been sized for diversified commercial loads only, and shall not be used for high load factor (continuous) temporary power uses, such as electric heaters for dry -out. Fault currents for non- residential transformers In your project are noted on the attached PSE design drawing. Please notify the PSE representative listed on this agreement immediately if you believe there are conflicts between this design and your project. It Is your responsibility to provide your project manager, site superintendent, and subcontractors with any information from this correspondence and it's attachments that apply to their work. POTENTIAL REFUNDS If PSE has not provided a Margin Allowance or if your Margin Allowance exceeds $75,000, PSE agrees to calculate and refund the Margin Allowance, subject to Schedule 85, up two (2) years after the line extension is energized. Other refunds associated with the line extension charge may be available if additional permanent service hook-ups are made to your line extension. These service hook-ups must be made within five (5) years of the date on which your project is initially energized Customers are responsible for making all refund requests. A refund may be requested one (1) time within six (6) years of the date on which your line extension Is initially energized. Your refund request should be directed to PSE's Customer Accounting Coordinators at schedule85refundreuuests aar)se.wm or your project manager. UNDERGROUND CONVERSIONS & STRFF_T LIGHTING COSTS This agreement does not cover underground conversions or street lighting To obtain these services please contact your project manager for further details or information. By signing this agreement you are authorizing PSE to continue with all the needed elements to complete your project. Please do not send payment with this agreement. Upon receipt of a signed agreement, PSE will bill you for the amount Indicated at the mailing address shown on the agreement PSE requires payment prior to firming up a construction date; delaying payment may result in a construction delay Changes in the scope of the project requested by you may result in either additional charges or refunds to the amount billed on this agreement. I have read and agree to the terms and conditions described in this agreement and the corresponding attachments. Ty Loper Customer Name: Customer Signature: Date: Regards Jeremy Paz, Project Manager 360-333-7056 jeremy.paz@pse.com DocuSi n Envelope ID: 48FA083A-775D-417A-9E78.3F9B13A5C5A7 fV PUGE 1 SOUND ENL-RGY Puget Sound Energy PA. Box 97034 Bc Ievue WA NW19734 PSEcom PSE ELECTRICAL FACILITIES EXCAVATION REQUIREMENTS AND FINAL GRADE CERTIFICATION PURPOSE This document is an agreement between Puget Sound Energy (PSE) and the OwnerlDeveloper (Developer) who is providing excavation for the installation of PSE's facilities. This document does not provide an easement for operating rights. If PSE determines that a recordable easement on the Developer's property or other property is necessary, it shall be the Developer's responsibility to obtain such easements in a form acceptable to PSE prior to construction. EXCAVATION REQUIREMENTS The requirements and conditions outlined below apply when you provide the excavation for PSE's electrical facilities as a condition of receiving electrical service for your project. If you need additional information, please call the PSE contact person listed below. 1. Developer is responsible for acquiring utility locates by calling One -Call, 1-800-424-5555 at least 48 hours (two full working week days) prior to digging. The excavation must meet the requirements of the Washington Administrative Code and Safety Standards. 2. Developer shall call the PSE contact person noted below for trench and route approval prior to starting excavation. 3. The electrical primary trench shall be excavated to provide a minimum of 36 inches of facility coverage, to a maximum trench depth of 48 inches. The electric service trench shall be excavated to provided a minimum of 24 inches of facility coverage, to a maximum trench depth of 36 inches. A 12 inch horizontal separation is required between PSE electrical facilities and other utilities within a joint trench. 4. All back fill must be free of sharp objects and construction debris. Developer shall provide and install sand bedding and shading for electrical facility protection as directed by PSE's contact person. Developer is responsible for any damages caused by improper backfill or compaction. 5. Developer agrees to maintain a minimum of 2 feet of horizontal clearance between PSE conduit, pipe or conductors and any foundation on Developer's property. 6. The vault excavation shall be dug to the dimensions noted on the attached work sketch. Vault holes shall have a solid level bottom with a 6 inch deep layer of crushed rock bedding. 7. Developer shall provide the excavation for PSE electrical facilities within the designed location. Developer shall identify and provide final grade, property lines, and utility easements prior to installation of PSE's electrical facilities. 8. Developer will be financially liable for the relocation of PSE's facilities which are inadequately covered, located outside the area where PSE has adequate operating rights, improperly graded inhibiting standard access and/or any damages resulting from dig -ins due to changes or variations in grade that are made after the installation of PSE's facilities. FINAL GRADE CERTIFICATION By my signing below, I certify that the electrical facilities work area shall be at final grade prior to excavation. I assume full responsibility for my excavation work and the resulting location of these facilities. I also agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Puget Sound Energy from all liability arising out of, or in connection with my work, including but not limited to all claims, losses, damages, and expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, which result from my failure to excavate within easement areas or rights-of-way, or from digging without adequate rights on adjoining properties. Date: Ty Loper Owner or Developer: Signature: PLEASE PRtM Project Address: 1976 Price Rd, Bremerton PSE Contact person: Jeremy Paz, Project Manager PSE Work Order: 105084652 2606 08115 DocuSign Envelope ID 48FA083A-775D-417A-9E78-3F9B13A5C5A7 40 PUGET SOUND ENERGY Puget F� P.O. B+ Bellevue:, W w,„ PSE.com REQUIREMENTS FOR TRENCHING BY CUSTOMERS ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAYS AND/OR ON PUGET SOUND ENERGY, INC. EASEMENTS The following outlines most local governmental guidelines and company standards for trenching on a public right-of-way or Puget Sound Energy, Inc. (PSE) easement. Any trenching performed by the customer, or their contractor, under a PSE permit or easement must comply with these requirements. 1. All trench construction must be performed by a Washington State licensed and bonded contractor. 2. Trench excavation, backfill, restoration, and facility placement must be coordinated with a PSE designated representative, and receive on-site approval by that representative, and local jurisdiction. 3. Right-of-way easement trenching and backfill must be performed during normal business hours, Monday through Friday. Same day excavation and backfill is required for all trenching. Job start notification to the local jurisdiction is the responsibility of Puget Sound Energy. Customer shall notify PSE Project Manager three working days prior to trenching. Penalties for failure to comply with this requirement will be bome by the customer. 4. If the job scope requires excavation beyond a single day, fencing and barricading must be installed around utility facilities exposed above the trench, if allowed, must be in accordance with local regulatory requirements. 5. PSE, all participating utilities, and One -Call Locate, must be notified a minimum of 72 hours in advance of the date and time for right-of-way trenching and facility placement. The One -Call Locate number is 1-800-424-5555. State law requires locating service notification. 6. Excavated material must remain clear of the roadway whenever possible. Excavation material, spoils, and debris shall be removed off-site each day, in accordance with local regulatory requirements. All erosion control requirements in accordance with local regulatory requirements are the responsibility of the customer. 7. Material excavated from the shoulder of the right-of-way shall be properly disposed, and replaced with select backfill material in accordance with local regulatory requirements. 8. Proper compaction is required to comply with local regulatory specifications. if the permit requires compaction testing, the cost of said testing is the responsibility of the customer. 9. All permit requirements, traffic control plans, traffic control and flagging shall meet local regulatory specifications and satisfaction. 10. In the event of failure to abide by the above requirements, PSE reserves the right, at its sole discretion, to assume trenching. In the event of delays due to equipment failure, PSE may assume trenching to meet regulatory and joint construction requirements. The customer is responsible for all trenching costs, and will reimburse the company for costs should PSE perform the trenching. (initial) 11. The customer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless PSE from all liability (including reasonable attorneys' fees) arising out of, or in connection with, the above mentioned trenching activities. (initial) R 08-23-2015 DocuSign Envelope ID 48FA083A-775D-417A-gE78-3F9B13A5C5A7 PUGET SOUND ENERGY Puget Sound Energy P.O. Box 97034 Bellevue. WA 88009-9734 PSE.com Job Number: 105084652 Trench Location: 1976 Price Rd, Bremerton Customer Name: Ty Loper I AGREE TO ADHERE TO THE ABOVE CONDITIONS Customer Signature Date Title R 08-23-2015 AGENDA BILL �� CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Professional Services Study Session Date: June 28, 2017 Agreement with BMcConsulting LLC for COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 5, 2017 Lobbying Services Department: Mayor Presenter: Patty Lent Phone: (360)473-5266 SUMMARY: This Consulting Agreement with BMcConsulting LLC will provide lobbying services from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. ATTACHMENTS: Professional Services Agreement; and Exhibit A (Scope of Work) FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The contract extension would require a budget adjustment in the amount of $24,000 in the Non -Departmental, General Fund Budget. There is sufficient fund balance in the General Fund to cover the additional expenditure. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ❑x No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑ Consent Agenda 0 General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor to extend the Professional Services Agreement with BMcConsulting LLC for substantially the same terms and conditions as presented; and increase the 2017 Non - Departmental, General Fund expenditure budget by $24,000. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BMcConsulting LLC The City of Bremerton ("City") and BMcConsulting LLC ("Consultant"), referred to collectively as the "Parties," enter into the following Agreement for professional services: L Scope: The Consultant agrees to perform the services more specifically described in the Scope of Work, including any attachments thereto, attached hereto as Exhibit A, which is incorporated by reference herein. The Scope of Work may be modified only pursuant to Section VII.H of this Agreement. If the Scope of Work provides for unspecified additional services such services shall only be performed upon the express written request of the City. Consultant further represents that the services furnished under this Agreement will be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices in effect at the time such services are performed. II. Term: The City and the Consultant agree that the term of this Agreement will be for one year beginning on July 1, 2017 and ending June 30, 2018. This Agreement may be terminated pursuant to Section IX. III. Compensation: In consideration of the services provided pursuant to this Agreement, the City shall pay Consultant $4,000.00 per month from July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017 and $5,000.00 per month from January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2018. The Consultant shall submit regular billing statements detailing work performed and amount charged on each task or portion thereof. The descriptions shall conform to and fall within the categories set out in the Scope of Work and/or Fee Schedule. Upon receipt of a conforming billing statement, the City shall promptly process payment. PROVIDED, HOWEVER, the City reserves the right to prioritize scoped work and accelerate and/or delay work tasks under the time frame set forth in Section II herein. The Consultant's labor rates and billing fees shall be as delineated in Exhibit C. Consultant shall not perform work beyond the Scope of Work, nor shall be compensated for such work, unless the Scope of Work or amount of compensation is modified pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant shall only be compensated for additional services if requested pursuant to Section I and, if not otherwise provided, such compensation shall be in accordance with Exhibit C. If a billing statement does not conform to this Agreement, the City may withhold payment until the statement is brought into compliance. Such withholding does not relieve Consultant of its obligations under this Agreement. IV. Relationship of Parties: Consultant represents that it is skilled in the matters addressed in the Scope of Work and is performing independent functions and responsibilities within its field of expertise. Consultant and its personnel are independent Consultants and not employees of the City. Consultant and its personnel have no authority to bind the City or to control the City's employees and other Consultants. None of the benefits provided by the City to its Bremerton/BMcConsulting LLC Lobbying Services Page 1 of 6 employees, including, but not limited to, compensation, insurance, and unemployment insurance are available from the City to the employees, agents, representatives, or sub -Consultants of the Consultant. Consultant will be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of Consultant's agents, employees, representatives and sub -Consultants during the performance of this Agreement. The City may, during the term of this Agreement, engage other independent Consultants to perform the same or similar work. As an independent Consultant, Consultant is responsible for its own management. The City's administration and enforcement of this Agreement shall not be deemed an exercise of managerial control over Consultant or its personnel. As an independent Consultant, Consultant is responsible for payment of all taxes and licensing fees necessary to perform its obligations under this Agreement. These taxes and fees include but are not limited to State industrial insurance, Business & Occupation, State professional licensing, and City business licensing. If any taxes or fees due the City have been declared delinquent, the City may withhold the delinquent amount, plus any additional charges arising from the delinquency, from any payments due Consultant. V. Indemnification: A. Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, arising out of or in connection with the performance of this Agreement except for that portion of the injuries and damages caused by the City's sole negligence, unless Consultant is conducting work pursuant to Subsection B below. The City's review or acceptance of any of the work when completed shall not be grounds to avoid any of these covenants of indemnification. B. Architects, Engineers and Any Other Professional Listed In and Performing Services Defined in RCW 4.24.115. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that Consultant's services provided pursuant to this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the Consultant's liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence. IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES THE CONSULTANT'S WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. VI. Insurance: The Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in BremertonBMcConsulting LLC Lobbying Services Page 2 of 6 connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees, sub -consultants or sub -Consultants. Before beginning work on the project described in this Agreement, the Consultant shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing: 1. Professional Liability insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 limit per occurrence/claim. 2. Workers Compensation insurance as statutorily required by the Industrial Insurance Act of the State of Washington. Any payment of deductible or self insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of the Consultant. All required policies shall be provided on an "occurrence" basis except professional liability insurance (if required), which may be provided on a "claims -made" basis. The City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability insurance policy, as respects work performed by or on behalf of the Consultant and a copy of an endorsement that is acceptable to the City, which names the City as an additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The City reserves the right to receive a certified copy of all the required insurance policies and endorsements. The City further reserves the right to reject any unacceptable policies and/or endorsements. The Consultant's Commercial General Liability insurance shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer's liability. The Consultant's insurance shall be primary and non-contributory insurance as respects the City and shall contain a waiver of subrogation against the City for claims arising out of any operations, liabilities and obligations to which coverage applies. It shall be an affirmative obligation upon Consultant to advise the City's Risk Manager by fax at (360) 473-5161, or by certified mail, return receipt requested to City of Bremerton, attn: Risk Management, 345 6 t Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337 within two days of the cancellation, suspension or substantive change of any insurance policy set out herein, and failure to do so shall be construed to be a breach of this Agreement. The City also reserves its unqualified right to require at any time and for any reason, proof of coverage in the form of a duplicate of the insurance policy with all endorsements as evidence of coverage. VII. General Conditions: A. Reports and Information: When requested by the City, Consultant shall furnish periodic reports and documents on matters covered by this Agreement. The reports and documents shall be furnished in the time and form requested. Consultant shall maintain Bremerton/BMcConsulting LLC Lobbying Services Page 3 of 6 accounting records in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) to substantiate all billed amounts. B. Ownership and Use of Records and Documents: Original documents, drawings, designs and reports, including those in electronic format, developed under this Agreement are the property of the City. All written information submitted by the City to the Consultant in connection with the services performed by the Consultant under this Agreement will be safeguarded by the Consultant to at least the same extent as the Consultant safeguards like information relating to its own business. If such information is publicly available or is already in Consultant's possession or known to it, or is rightfully obtained by the Consultant from third parties, Consultant shall bear no responsibility for its disclosure, inadvertent or otherwise. All data, documents and files created by Consultant under this Agreement may be stored at Consultant's office in , Washington. Consultant shall make such data, documents, and files available to the City upon its request at all reasonable times for the purpose of editing, modifying and updating as necessary until such time as the City is capable of storing such information in the City's offices. Duplicate copies of this information shall be provided to the City upon its request, and at reasonable cost. All documents, including all reports, drawings, specifications, computer software or other items prepared or furnished by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, are instruments of service with respect to the project and are the property of the City. Any reuse by the City for other than the specific purpose intended will be at City's sole risk. C. Use of Photographs and Images. Consultant shall not use or distribute photographs or images depicting City officials, personnel, property, or equipment whether prepared by Consultant or provided by City without prior written consent of the City. The City will not unreasonably withhold its consent. D. Work Performed at Consultant's Risk: Consultant shall take all precautions necessary and shall be responsible for the safety of its employees, agents, and sub -consultants in the performance of the work hereunder and shall utilize all protection necessary for that purpose. All work shall be done at Consultant's own risk, and Consultant shall be responsible for any loss of or damage to materials, tools, or other articles used or held for use in connection with the work. E. Place of Work: The Consultant shall perform the work authorized under this Agreement at its offices in , Washington. Meetings with the City staff as described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, shall take place at the City's offices, or at locations mutually agreed upon by the parties. F. Entire Agreement: This Agreement and its Exhibits constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties, and the Parties acknowledge that there are no other agreements, written or oral, that have not been set forth in the text of this Agreement. BremertonBMcConsulting LLC Lobbying Services Page 4 of 6 G. Severability: Should any part of this Agreement be found void, the balance of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. H. Modification: This Agreement may only be modified by written instrument signed by both Parties. I. Written Notices: All communications regarding this Agreement shall be sent to the parties at the addresses listed below by registered or 1st class mail, or by personal service, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to the addressee at the address stated in this Agreement or such other address as may be hereafter specified in writing. City Address Consultant Address J. Waiver: Failure to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed a waiver of that provision. Waiver of any right or power arising out of this Agreement shall not be deemed waiver of any other right or power. K. Non -Waiver of Breach: The failure of the City to insist upon strict performance of any of the covenants and agreements contained herein, or to exercise any option herein conferred in one or more instances shall not be construed to be a waiver or relinquishment of said covenants, agreements or options, and the same shall be and remain in full force and effect. L. Compliance with Laws: Consultant shall comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws in performing its obligations under this Agreement. M. Choice of Law and Venue: This Agreement shall be interpreted according to the laws of the State of Washington. Any judicial action to resolve disputes arising out of this Agreement shall be brought in Kitsap County Superior Court. N. Attorneys' Fees: In the event of litigation to enforce any of the terms or provisions herein, each party shall pay all its own costs and attorney's fees. O. Assignment: Any assignment of this agreement by the Consultant without the written consent of the City shall be void. VIII. Nondiscrimination: Consultant shall not discriminate in employment or services to the public on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, marital status, disability, or sexual orientation except for employment actions based on bona fide occupational qualification. IX. Termination: Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time for any reason upon thirty (30) days prior written notice, subject to those obligations set forth in this Agreement Bremerton/BMcConsulting LLC Lobbying Services Page 5 of 6 which arise upon or survive termination. Any Notice by Consultant shall include a report showing the status of all items listed in the Scope of Work current through the termination date. A. Rights Upon Termination: In the event of termination, the City shall pay for all services performed by the Consultant to the effective date of termination, as described on a final invoice submitted to the City. After termination, the City may take possession of all records and data within the Consultant's possession pertaining to this project which may be used by the City without restriction. Any such use not related to the project which Consultant was contracted to perform shall be without liability or legal exposure to the Consultant. X. Suspension & Debarment. For contracts involving Federal funding, Consultant hereby certifies, by signing this agreement, that neither it nor its principals are presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any Federal department or agency. Consultant shall provide immediate written notice to the City if at any time it learns that it is or has become ineligible for certification. Should Consultant enter into a covered transaction with another firm, Consultant agrees by signing this agreement that it will verify that the firm with whom it intends to do business is not debarred, suspended, ineligible, excluded or disqualified. CITY OF BREMERTON CONSULTANT its: its: Date: Date: Approved as to form: Bremerton City Attorney R:\Legal\Legal\Contracts\EXECUTIVE\BMcConsulting 2017.doc BremertonBMcConsulting LLC Lobbying Services Page 6 of 6 Attest: City Clerk EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF WORK Consultant shall provide the City of Bremerton with the following governmental affairs services: • Work with the Mayor and City Council to develop a holistic legislative agenda. • Meet with Legislators to promote city legislative agenda items. • Develop 2018 legislative agenda in conjunction with the Bremerton Mayor and City Council. • Develop and lobby for Transportation and Capital Budget funding requests identified by the Council and the Mayor. • Lobby the Legislature on all issues developed under the legislative program. • Lobby defensively on legislation that is introduced that would negatively impact the City. • BMcConsulting would register as the City's lobbyist with the Public Disclosure Commission. • Attend and, as needed, help organize, West Sound Alliance meetings to ensure City of Bremerton interests are addressed. • Attend/monitor Puget Sound Coordinating Council to ensure City of Bremerton interests are addresses. If Consultant is hired to support the City of Bremerton during session, the following will be included to the scope of work: • Provide the Mayor and City Council with a weekly legislative report during the legislative session that includes weekly hearing schedules and a summary of bills important to the City. Identify legislation that would impact the City of Bremerton specifically. • Attend all relevant legislative hearings. • Develop talking points and testimony, as needed, for meetings with Legislators and testimony before legislative committees; help coordinate such visits with city officials. 1 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON 8B CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Study Session Date: June 28, 2017 Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 5, 2017 Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Department: City Council Neighborhood Block Parties Presenter: Richard Huddy Phone: (360)473-5280 SUMMARY: The proposed ordinance amends Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" by adding a new section, Section 5.36.080, relating to neighborhood block parties. The motion for adopting the ordinance establishes a $25 street closure fee for neighbor block parties for 2017. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 5328 amending Chapter 5.36 entitled "Special Events" FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ❑x No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑ Consent Agenda ❑x General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to pass Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events"; and establishing a $25 street closure fee for neighborhood block parties for 2017. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action ORDINANCE NO. 5328 AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, amending Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events." WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" by amending provisions relating to neighborhood block parties, NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION]. Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" is hereby amended by adding a new section, Section 5.36.080, relating to neighborhood block parties as follows: 5.36.010 LICENSE - REQUIRED. No person, firm, company, or corporation shall run, manage, operate, or conduct any circus, parade, carnival games/rides, street fairs, sidewalk sales, or other promotional activity within the City without first obtaining a regulatory license, in addition to a business license. 5.36.020 LICENSE - TERMS. The City reserves the right to charge any sponsor of a special event direct costs incurred by the City as a result of the event. Such costs may include the cost of barricading streets, plan reviews, or public safety involvement 5.36.050 SPONSOR TO PROVIDE VENDOR LIST. The sponsor of the event will provide the City Clerk with a list of all participating vendors at least three days prior to the event. 5.36.060 USE OF CITY STREETS AND SIDEWALKS. No person, firm, company, or corporation shall run, manage, operate, or conduct sidewalk sales, business activities or special events of any nature upon any sidewalk, street, highway, alley or other public property within the City, unless such activity is for the general public welfare and benefit. 5.36.070 COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER PROVISIONS. No license shall be issued to any person, firm, company or corporation to run, operate, conduct or manage any show, exhibition, game or other special event within the City which is in violation of any ordinance of the City or statute of the State of Washington. 5.36.075 INSURANCE REQUIRED. Any person, firm, company, or corporation receiving a license pursuant to this Chapter shall provide a certificate of insurance with minimum liability coverage of $500,000.00 combined single limit bodily injury and property damage, including products liability if food and/or beverage vending is part of the special event or public amusement. The certificate of Special Events — 2017 Update insurance shall name the City as an additional insured if the license is for an event held on City property. 5.36.080 NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK PARTY - EXEMPTION. Neighborhood block parties are exempt from having_to apply for and obtain a special apply for and obtain a special event permit. However, in the event a neighborhood block party will require a street closure, an application for street closure must be applied for using the form and process similar to that used for street closures for special events and with such terms and conditions as established by the Director of Public Works and Utilities, or designee ("Director"). The granting of a street closure is subject to the discretion of the Director. For the purpose of this section, neighborhood block party is defined as follows: Neighborhood block parties provide opportunities to connect with neighbors, celebrate, work on common projects, and strengthen community relationships. These events are held and attended by people living along the street, they the street, they are not intended to be publicized or open to the general public. SECTION2. 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 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force ten (10) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council the day of )2017. ERIC YOUNGER, Council President Approved this day of )2017. PATTY LENT, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk PUBLISHED the day of EFFECTIVE the day of ORDINANCE NO. ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney 2017. 2017. 2 Special Events — 2017 Update FY L gig m IN 95 City of Bremerton Neighborhood Block Party COST OF PERMITS AND INSURANCE $100 Special Permit Fee $300 Liability Insurance S100 Street Closure $500 Permits and Insurance http://www.kirklandwa.Rov/depart/parks/Permits and Reservations/Sped aIEvents. htm# } Home page } Departments r Parks & Glmmuni¢y5eNices t PErmi6I RmNadons t 5pedal''-uns Special Events If yo a are holding a publicly attended event in whole or part on public property you need a permit_ TI,e Clicy of Kirkland issues the following types of event permits_ • Special Event (festival, run, walk, etc_) • Park Use -;activities contained vdthin a park) • Community Program (on-going activities such as a farmer's market or =_r -o -ming arts series) Fillrrtl Photography • Block Party (Neighborhood gatherings) See the Resource Center for more information_ First Step Anyone interested in hosting an event should contact the Special Projects Coordinator at Tel kavmsOt lrjrklandwa_ecav or ca 11425-587-334-7 to discuss the event and request an Interest Form; the first step towards putting an event proposal together. Events are the cornerstone for community celebrations and gatherings. However, producing an evert requires a lot of planning_ Please refer to the Special Event Guide for is general overview cf City regulations and requirements. Answers to common questions: What is a special event? A sp,ecia' e: inc ides_ ary activity that occurs on private or public property and a.�e.ts ,-e card nery _se of public streets., rights -of -ways. and/or sidewalks. Z'.- rract.ca. purposes, this .rcluces, but is riot limited to parades, fun runs, cycl ink, art fai rs, a nd festiva Is_ Why do I need to apply for a permit for my event? To assure t- a t a in activity meets lega I requirements of the use of public right- of-vvays. To enable the City to ensure adequate services such as public safety, traffic control and sanitation are schreduled. To alert the City to any unusual event which should be known tca the providers of emergency services. How do I obtain a permit for my event? Contact the Special Projects Coordinator or call 425-587-3347 to discuss the event and request an Event Interest Form. The permit application process officially begins onc.2 a- Eve -t I -,-et e_t =o -m is submitted and the date and venue are confirmred. E, -;em -tares-- Faun_ are accepted up to one year in advance as eve- i ca -es are it-i-.ec and reserved on a first -Come. �Irst-senved basis. Once the date and venue are confirmed, you will receive a permit app'fication, event guide, and acceptance letter which outlines the application cim-eline, deadlines, and meeting daces. 4th ofjuly Firev,,:rks UPCOMING EVENTS 2417 Events Calendar July Wednesdays: Kirkland Wednesday Market Thursdays: Evening summer Concerts Pridays.luanita Friday Market 4: Celebrate Kirkland I4th ofI* 11,18, 25: Children's Summer Concer[s 14-16. Kirkland Uncorked 29: Grtyt Walkathon 29-34: Kirkland Classk Car Show & Dance July 34 - August 5: Ir. Softball World Series AWust Wednesdays: Kirkland Wednesday Market Fridays: luanita Friday Market I -5: Ir. Softball World Series 1, 8, 15, 22: CNWren's Summer Concert 3, 14, 17: Evening Summer Concerts 11, 12,13: Kirkdand Summerk 15: Toed ing of the Boats 19: ygafest 20. Lenny6est 27: Park to Park Swim for more information or to find other scheduled events, please wish: ExploreKirkland.com City Events Calendar http://www.kirklandwa.gov/depart/parks/Permits and Reservations/Sped aIEvents. htm# What is free speech activity? This cr�,cecced c ass cf ac:', cies i -cures concuct for the sale purpose of which is :o corn Tun ca -.e pc�li: ical or religious Ideas. No fee or clor5 6,n ~7a be c-3rgec c•,,regs red as ccrdidon of participation in or attendance atsuc activity. Expressive activity does not inck,de fa rs, -fest v3 Is. ccnceris. oerfermances, paradesr athletic events, fund raising events, or events for entertainment - Do I need a Special Event Permit for free speech activities? Activities which are publiclyattended and he i- ,,no a or it pal upon pub Fc'y° owned property or p,b''c r ghty-cf-way. of if hel,: wholly, upon private property, t,'ll nevertheless affect cr ir-pa : -hv ordinary Enc normal use by the 1envre pvboc of p.. ~I _ arcperty or public rigtts-of-way w thin .re c n,,7 cf s.,cr 3:ri, iry eq,i res a Si,ecial Ev--n: %-,[Tit. For irn rorrp:v Er oressi e Ever c- 'i.e. -ree scjeech events such as candlelight vic Is! i--en,!ec to be -e d cn crrvli, c ipercy cn er -- erir, o• z:ee<vrc °n. -o wh c-1 adv5rcv :c-o•d rion with the City far permitting s nQ:fea:iole. 'Pie ark.11at :he event organizer nc-dfi :re; i v c ::n;a:: n= e K rr; nc Police Derar. erc nor-e-iergency n.. T ter a 5-, 163-' S. How much will a permit cost overall? This de,enos on the scop~ o,= .re e;erc..' I events are required co pay a non-refundable application fee. Additional fees required to provide services necessa 1 -o• cub is hea:h. sa'ety and welfare may be identified through the review process. For example, additional fees may be requir=c co ,rcvide -af=ic :-�rtra and sanitation. Refer to the Special Event Guide for a list of common event related fees. When do it pay the fees? All `ees are .o ae paid p-i�r :o permit unlessatherwise provided in the conditions of approval. Da I need insurance? Yes, all events must provGde proof of commercial general IiiabiNity insurance f :h= :,vra:lor ofihe e -<L -n: 31ca g ::irr an naming the City as an additional insured on the policy. What else should I Consider when I applyfDra permit? Depvncinc o- the scone o- your proposal, you may, be required to make arrangements for notification to affected businesses anti r--icences, sin:acion facilities, traffic control equipment, electrical inspections, King County health department 'nspe:t crs, -i•sr aid stations, etc. City sc3ff will assist you in identifyiing these needs. However, the applicant has sale responsibiliity for eb:a nirg regti re permits and co -i.-21,; ng rri n the City's Special Events Ordinance. Refer to the Special Event Guide for a general overview a- i -y regulations and eq,i re nems. What are the reasons for denying event permits? Permits for eve --s p•o:ec:ec u-dLrthe :i -s: 3n Fsu reel,., A-1,Fdments are subject to reasonable exercise of p, sl c ccn:roo• Ill it then:e•esc o- pub 'c health, safer,: r -o 31 c.: arrrd w.-Ifare- Fora cher- periTits. acp 'cacions will be denied if the proposed activity c1sruptstraffic beyond practical solution; inter==res wi:h 3, -cess to fire stations arrrd f re rtycrants; causes undue hardship to surrounding residences or businesses; requires :11v ersion o- so iT,any r•ut+lic e-I&O fees iha- se^;lie is denied the Dublicat Ial endangers the public health, safety or welfare; the app icsn: -ais:o provide cc;rrp e.e and accurate information or comply with the terms of the permit; is unlawful, or fails to comply wich applicable legal eauirrreiT,ent. What can I do if I feel my permit has been unfairly denied? You may aol I31 n :,,r circ ;int' d rg Lmail) within seven [7] business days of notification of denial. ofwR� City of Kirkland NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK PARTY PERMIT APPLICATION APPLICANT INFORMATION Name: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Email: BLOCK PARTY INFORMATION Date: Hours: a.m./p.m. to a.m./p.m. # of Guests: Street to be closed: From (cross street): To (cross street): Activities (Select all that apply.) ❑ Amplified Music ❑ Fire Barrel/Bonfire ❑ Inflatable Bouncers ❑ Tents/Canopies (+400sf) Describe activities/entertainment not included above: COMMUNITY RESOURCES (When available, representatives will attend neighborhood gatherings upon request. Make selection below.) Kirkland Police ❑ YES ❑ NO I Kirkland Fire ❑ YES ❑ NO REQUIRED ATTACHMENT (Applicants should keep copies of all paperworkfor their records.) Attach a STREET CLOSURE MAP showing the following information: 1. Street closures (i.e. Street names, road closed barricades/signs, etc.) 2. A 20 -foot emergency access lane 3. Applicant name, date and time of block party INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS By submitting this application the Applicant agrees to comply with all applicable city ordinances and all applicable requirements of state and federal law. The undersigned hereby makes application for use of public right-of-way and certifies the information provided in this application and supporting material is true and accurate. Applicant is aware all information contained herein is subject to public disclosure in accordance with the Washington State Public Disclosure Act. Applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Kirkland, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against any and all claims, suits, actions, or liabilities for injury or death of any person, or for loss or damage to property, which arises out of the Event or from any activity, work or thing done, permitted, or suffered by Applicant during the Event, except only such injury or damage as shall have been occasioned by the sole negligence of the city. Signature: Date: RETURN COMPLETED APPLICATION, STREET CLOSURE MAP, QUESTIONS AND NON-REFUNDABLE $25.00 APPLICATION FEE TO: City of Kirkland Sudie Elkayssi, Special Projects Coordinator Attn: Sudie Elkayssi (425) 587-3347 123 Fifth Avenue selkayssi(cDkirklandwa.eov Kirkland, WA 98033 www.kirklandwa.gov/specialevents FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: KPD ❑ KFD ❑ PW ❑ Payment Received: Revised January 2017 Neighborhood Block Party Permit Application & Guidelines Page 1 of 5 OF wq Sudie Elkayssi CITY OF KIRKLAND City of Kirkland � G 123 Soh Avenue NEIGHBORHOOD BLOCK PARTY GUIDELINES Kirkland, 98033 KING 425-587-333447 selkayssi@kirklandwa.gov Neighborhood block parties provide opportunities to connect with neighbors, celebrate, work on common projects, and strengthen community relationships. These events are held and attended by people living along the street, they are not intended to be publicized or open to the general public. A Neighborhood Block Party permit is required for neighborhood events that temporarily close a street. To apply for a permit follow these guidelines. APPLICATION A complete application must be received no less than 10 business days prior to the event or it will not be processed. 1. Applicant must live on the street to be closed and serve as event contact. 2. Block party may be held between 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. 3. A complete application includes the application, map of street closure, and application fee. FEES A non-refundable $25.00 application fee is due at the time of application. 1. Checks should be made payable to the City of Kirkland. 2. Credit card and cash payments are accepted in person at the cashier's desk with advance notice. National Night Out - The application fee is waived for events held in conjunction with National Night Out which is generally held the first Tuesday in August each year. See the National Night Out section below for more information. NOTIFICATION Applicant is responsible for contacting neighbors to share details of the block party and temporary street closure. Access must be provided for neighbors not attending the party. STREET CLOSURE When temporarily closing a street for block party activities, an adult monitor should be assigned to each street closure to let local traffic in/out, provide emergency access, and answer questions. Applicant may not close: 1. Arterial streets. 2. Intersections. 3. Streets with a bus stop. The Fire Department requires: 1. A 20 -foot emergency access lane be maintained at all times. 2. Hydrants and fire protection connections remain clear at all times. 3. Access and egress be maintained at all times. Applicant is responsible for obtaining and positioning barricades/street closure signs. See attached example. 1. Large portable items such as yard waste bins can be used with large street closure signs attached, or 2. 'Street Closed' barricades can be rented from a local traffic control company. 3. The City does not lend or rent equipment. At the conclusion of the event, Applicant should return the street to its original condition and remove the barricades. Revised January 2017 Neighborhood Block Party Permit Application & Guidelines Page 2 of 5 COMPLAINTS The best way to handle complaints is to avoid one in the first place. Be a good neighbor and provide advance notice to adjacent property owners. Most complaints are reported when activities are unreasonably loud, have been going on for a long period of time, or take place during "quiet" hours. If a complaint is received, a police officer will be sent to the location to address the situation. NATIONAL NIGHT OUT National Night Out (NNO) is a nationwide campaign to raise awareness of crime and drug prevention. Permit fees are waived for neighborhoods holding block parties in conjunction with NNO in an effort to strengthen neighborhood spirit and support increased awareness. Police, Fire and other city officials attend NNO parties upon request. For more information go to: https://natw.org/. Please note - If a NNO event will be held entirely on private property and no streets will be closed, simply register event activities by contacting the Kirkland Police Department at 425-587-3401 at least 48 hours in advance. Revised January 2017 Neighborhood Block Party Permit Application & Guidelines Page 3 of 5 BLOCK PARTY STREET CLOSURE EXAMPLE 1. Place barricades with "STREET CLOSED" signs across the entire roadway at each closure. 2. Keep tables/setup to one side of street in order to maintain a 20' emergency access lane. 3. Assign an adult monitor at each closure to movie barricades for neighbor and emergency vehicle access. J EC TREET LOSED STREET CLOSED r STREET CLOSED STREET LOED 5 �54} 5 1 STREET CLOSED ELM STREET 039010 933010 133819 133HIS � MONITOR 207 FIRE LANE W Block party d setup/activities r 207 L1J FIRE LANE MONITOR STREET STREET CLOSED CLOSED ASH STREET Revised January 2017 Neighborhood Block Party Permit Application & Guidelines Page 4 of 5 Revised January 2017 Neighborhood Block Party Permit Application & Guidelines Page 5 of 5 From: Lori Smith on behalf of City Council Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 4.00 PM To: kevin northxwest.com Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Request - Neighborhood Block Party Support (Kevin Gorman) Mr. Gorman, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which I have provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. Due to the subject matter, a copy was also shared with Mayor Lent; as well as the City Attorney and Risk Manager for their review and input. It is appreciated that you took the time to contact the City. Legislative Assistant Bremerton City Council 13501473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.gov From: kevin northxwest.com [mailto:kevin@northxwest.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 2:19 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us, Subject: Neighborhood Block Party Support Greetings Council, I'm part of the Bremerton Neighborhoods Now organization. As a champion for the Manette neighborhood, we are asking that you help strengthen our community by removing barriers that prevent neighbors from meeting in the public right of way. Significantly reducing the permitting process and cost will allow us to hold neighborhood block parties and meet our neighbors informally. I believe social communities are healthy communities. Bremerton's Comprehensive Plan LU4 goal states, "Promote healthy communities by allowing for healthy lifestyle choices. Thank you all for your dedicated service. I trust you will continue to support Bremerton's vision of healthy and connected communities. Devin Gorman e) kevin northxwest.com p) (206) 817-6326 From: Lori Smith on behalf of City Council Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 4:00 PM To: 'Joy Turner' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Joy Turner) Attachments: JULY S, 2017.pdf Ms. Turner, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under Genera! Business Item 88 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Legislative Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Cit .Council ci.bremerton.wa.us www- BremertonWA. ov Li9 From: Joy Turner [mailto:joy9sage@icloud.com] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 3:37 PM To: City Council<City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Parties I feel very strongly about the issue of Block parties and the extremely high cost. I feel that getting to know our neighbors can help in so many ways. We will look out for each other. I live alone and I am a senior and it feels good that someone has my back. I am hoping this issue is resolved by reducing the cost AND abolishing the practice of needing proof of insurance. Thank you and Sincerely, Joy Turner 1007 Dibb Street Bremerton, WA Namaste From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:01 AM To: 'Rhoda Teal Gage' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Rhoda Gage) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Gage, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under Genera/ Business Item 88 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. 6biize Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: Rhoda Teal Gage [mailto:grgage@msn.com] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 4:18 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: block party costs Dear City Council Members and Mayor Lent, I read on the Next Door website an article by Jean Schanen about Councilman Huddy's effort to change our city ordinance to make it cost about $25 to be allowed to put on a block party instead of about $500. 1 wholeheartedly support that effort. If people in a neighborhood want to go to the effort to gather for a block party I think the city should do everything possible to make it easy for them to do that. This ordinance does that --makes it easier and less costly for neighbors to put on a block party. Please support our neighborhoods; please vote for this new ordinance modeled on one successfully used in Kirkland. Sincerely, Rhoda Gage 1558 Pennsylvania Ave. Bremerton, WA 98337 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:04 AM To: 'DW Nelson' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Dan Nelson) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. Nelson, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to Council Member Pat Sullivan and the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as apart of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. ���ai.6t�ze �xeniez Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: DW Nelson [mailto:nelson.dw360@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 6:23 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block party legislation : attn council member Sullivan Hello Council member Sullivan I support the idea brought forth by Council member Huddy regarding block party permit fees. In this day and age, I feel it is imperative that we do everything we can to build community. It's all too easy to find reasons to not engage with people face-to-face. If people actually want to get together as a neighborhood, it should be easy to do, and the city should encourage that. This legislation removes removes the current financial barrier that keeps many people from pursuing a block party. Aside from those who would willingly go, a block party is a chance for people who typically wouldn't engage to simply walk out their door and be surrounded by their community. It makes community connection easy. I can't think of a better way to build bridges, reinforce community safety, and build the trust that is so sorely lacking in other areas of our lives today than getting to know the people who live around you, while celebrating what makes your neighborhood great. I hope you also support this legislation. Thank you for your service. Feel free to email me if you have any questions or concerns. Have a great weekend. Dan Nelson Cedargrove St From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:09 AM To: 'Carolee Valentine' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Carolee Valentine) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Valentine, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to Council Member Jerry McDonald and the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as apart of the record under General Business Item 86 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov -----Original Message ----- From: Carolee Valentine [mailto:ckvalentine@mac.com] Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 7:17 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Parties As a voter in District 3 in Bremerton, I would encourage Councilman McDonald to vote to lower the cost of a permit to hold a neighborhood block party to $25. Sent from my Wad From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:11 AM To: 'Roses' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Les and Kay Rose) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. and Mrs. Rose, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to Council Member Richard Huddy and the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as apart of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov M-1 -----Original Message ----- From: Roses [mailto:leskayrose@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, July 1, 2017 8:24 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block parties district 6 Les and Kay Rose, we live on Marine Dr. We support the proposed change to that of Kirkland. I From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:19 AM To: 'glen@glendavisphotography.com' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Glen Davis) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. Davis, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. l ite &"Uez Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: glen@glendavisphotography.com [mailto:glen@glendavisphotography.com] Sent: Sunday, July 2, 2017 12:58 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Your attention Please! Pass this on. To All Council members, Block parties are happening all over the county now that it's summer. They are a great way for neighbors to get to know each other and build community. Not so much in Bremerton, however, because the city requires a $100 permit fee plus liability insurance costing around $400 before they can happen. It is my humble opinion that it is time that City leaders start thinking a little more progressively and allow for more growth. Growth in ideas and implementation of those ideas. It seems that the citizens of this community are always asked for money as the first order of business when a plan or new idea is proposed, which often times stifles the idea and then it dies. Hence, we stay in the same place. Anyone who has lived here for 30 years or more have witnessed the result of Leaders' refusal to support new ideas. Look around the Peninsula and you see the result of forward thinking. Not here though. Our community tax payers can't even look forward to getting holes patched on the streets on which they live. Have you driven the streets of East Bremerton, and in particular Manette, up and down Perry Ave, Trenton got a few blocks redone. Is that where one of you live?? Curious. Where is the Civic Pride in City Hall and Council Chambers? It seems to be absent. I have quietly sat and waited for the momentum to continue that was started by a few elected officials of the somewhat recent past, only to witness, well... nothing of significance happen. Seems to me that if you all want to serve the City and her citizens, some of you would at least get behind the idea of block parties. Is it possible that you are afraid of what the citizens of a community can accomplish when they put their collective heads together and push an idea forward without your unanimous consent? My wife and I made this City our home on purpose. Not for a job one of us got, not because one of us were stationed here by the Navy .... we chose you on purpose. We wanted to grow. I want to be a part of something GREAT! Make it great! Please do your job and stop waiting for the sky to fall. With appreciation, Glen Davis With appreciation, From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:15 AM To: 'David Hedger' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (David Hedger) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. Hedger, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to Council Member Jerry McDonald and the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as apart of the record under General Business Item 86 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. (a�.2e 0"niez Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov -----Original Message ----- From: David Hedger [mailto:dhe4971@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, July 1, 2017 4:37 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Party Proposal by Huddy Jerry: I tried to set up a block party for Terrace Street earlier this month and was told of the $100 fee and requirement of $300 worth of insurance for the city. I thought this was steep for a small party with two blocks of mostly senior residents with no alcohol involved. I understand that Richard Huddy has proposed an ordinance that would reduce the cost to $25.00. That is certainly more reasonable and I hope you would express these thoughts at the next council meeting. These types of events are usually well attended and as in the past a great way for neighbors to meet and build a strong neighborhood identity. Thanks for your assistance. Dave Hedger From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:36 AM To: 'Marlena Marie' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinances relating to Block Parties and "War Boxes" (Marlena Marie) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Marie, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Also, your comments regarding "War Boxes" have been shared with Community Development staff; and will be included as part of the record for the Public Hearing and Ordinance to approve 2017 Zoning Code Amendments (ADU's) Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. iW64ine &OWIMz Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: Marlena Marie[mailto:6centsmarketing@gmail.com) Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 4:51 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Parties and War Boxes Hello Mr Davis, I'll be working at the hospital on the 5th but if I were available, instead I would love to attend this week's council meeting to express my support for the change that, if approved, would allow for neighbors to gather to connect and share in this great city without the ridiculous fee of hundreds of dollars in permits and insurance. Instead, I would like to see Bremerton take the example that Kirkland uses so that we can have unifying Block Parties in neighborhoods all over Bremerton. Please vote in favor of changing to the $25 process. Also, I'm very interested in the discussion about the war box houses that has been postponed to the 19th. I just bought one with my main home, and was excited to learn the history. If I'm free from work that night I will certainly be there. Regardless of my attendance I urge you to vote in favor of anything that would facilitate restoration of these historic homes, as well as the use of environmentally friendly tiny homes like them. Thank you, Marlena Marie Born and Raised in Kitsap and New Resident/Owner @ 2005&2007 6th Street. From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:36 AM To: Michael Shoemaker Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Michael Shoemaker) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. Shoemaker, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 88 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. 6bi�te �xeruez Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: Michael Shoemaker [mailto:mfshoe6606@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 5:27 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block parties The fees that are being charged for block parties and community functions are outrageous. Please look into the prices other city's charge and ajust our charges according. From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:39 AM To: 'Speare' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Jacquelyn Speare) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Speare, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to Council Member Jerry McDonald and the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as apart of the record under General Business Item 86 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. r'44W (ate Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.sov From: Speare [mailto:bjspeare@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:17 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Neighborhood Block Party Hello City Council, Our neighborhoods would like to have block parties this summer but are discouraged by the high costs imposed by the City. Under the City of Bremerton's special event permit procedure, residents who organize a neighborhood block party are required to pay $100 for the application fee, $250-350 for liability insurance, and up to $100 for street closure or a park reservation. $450-550 seems unreasonable to me. Councilman Richard Huddy presented an alternative plan, modeled on the ordinance in place in the City of Kirkland, allowing neighborhoods to have block parties, including street closure, for the nominal fee of $25. Kirkland has been using the ordinance for years without difficulty. Other cities, like Poulsbo, Seattle and Vancouver, encourage block parties with easy applications and minimal fees. Jerry McDonald, as your constituent I am asking that you vote in favor of this new policy. Last Summer we were unable to host a block party in the revitalizing Evergreen Park neighborhood because we were not able to acquire liability insurance and it was just too costly. Please support this new ordinance so we can continue to build an inclusive community and get to know our neighbors. Kind Regards, Jacquelyn Speare District 3 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:43 AM To: 'Linda Weinacker' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Linda Weinacker) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Weinacker, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 86 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 City.CouncilC-Dci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov -----Original Message ----- From: Linda Weinacker [mailto:tntl@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 9:30 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block parties I was in the process of planning a neighborhood party this summer but I'm all in on the block party! I vote YES Sent from my iPhone Linda B Weinacker Your anti aging specialist 2514224713 Tntl@comcast.net Nuskin scientist featured on the discovery channel Biophotonic scanner featured on dr oz Preagelocme.com Sent from my iPhone Linda B Weinacker Your anti aging specialist 2514224713 Tntl@comcast.net Nuskin scientist featured on the discovery channel Biophotonic scanner featured on dr oz Preagelocme.com From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:45 AM To: 'Tiffany Royal' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Tiffany Royal) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Royal, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to Council Member Jerry McDonald and the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as apart of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. 6ti�te �a'eyuex Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov ``..e� 1. P From: Tiffany Royal[mailto:tiffanymarieroyal@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2017 9:08 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block party permitting change Hello City Council, Our neighborhoods would like to have block parties this summer but are discouraged by the high costs imposed by the City. Under the City of Bremerton's special event permit procedure, residents who organize a neighborhood block parry are required to pay $100 for the application fee, $250-350 for liability insurance, and up to $100 for street closure or a park reservation. $450-550 seems unreasonable to me. Councilman Richard Huddy presented an alternative plan, modeled on the ordinance in place in the City of Kirkland, allowing neighborhoods to have block parties, including street closure, for the nominal fee of $25. Kirkland has been using the ordinance for years without difficulty. Other cities, like Poulsbo, Seattle and Vancouver, encourage block parties with easy applications and minimal fees. Jerry McDonald, as your constituent, I ask you support this new ordinance. Tiffany Royal 703 11th st 98337 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:48 AM To: 'MT Zion Bremerton' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Pastor Richmond Johnson) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Pastor Johnson, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov P From: MT Zion Bremerton [mailto:mtzionmbc@qwestoffice.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2017 9:55 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: The need for inexpensive Block Parties On behalf of MT Zion Members to our City Council Members: We are going through some trying times and many of our members and community friends are struggling financially. However the need for block parties build cohesive neighbors and save the city money because they drive down crime and criminal activity. Charging us over $500.00 to be better communities is an insult to our underprivileged citizens. Please consider following the city of Kirkland, Poulsbo, and Seattle who has a less expensive process for block parties. Your support for our community in this concern is desired. We thank you on credit for doing the right thing God bless your heart; Richmond Johnson Pastor, MT Zion Missionary Baptist Church Bremerton, WA 98404 (360)377-9169 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:52 AM To: 'Beverly Kincaid' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Beverly Kincaid) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf, Bremerton City Council.docx Ms. Kincaid, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail and attached letter, which have been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. Your letter will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. W4, ONe &Pwuez Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@_ ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov 01 ff Im From: Beverly Kincaid [mailto:beverly@soundresourcesnw.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2017 11:57 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Neighborhood gatherings To `Whom it -'A4ay Concern. Please make sure that aCCCouncd members receive the attached Letter. Thank you, BeverCy Xincaid Beverly Kincaid 525 Lebo Boulevard #E-3 Bremerton, WA 98310 July 3, 2017 Bremerton City Council 345 6th Street, Suite 600 Bremerton, WA 98337 RE: What is getting to know your neighbors worth? Dear Council Members: Thank you for the work you do to make Bremerton a livable city. You can do more to improve the livability and safety by offering pro -active support of community block parties. At this time, many of our neighborhoods are priced out of the market if they want to organize a neighborhood block party where they might enjoy the fellowship and also create a safer community of sharing and caring. Achieving this greater level of vibrancy would be much more popular if the Council would allow for just a nominal permit fee for this type of activity. Liability insurance and application fees can exceed $500 currently, and this seems totally wrong in a city in which per income capita is under $26,000. Many of our residents are transient and connected with the military. Affordable organized block parties would offer great socialization, and community sharing and caring and safety. You can make this happen by allowing for just a nominal fee for a permit and eliminating the liability costs associated with block parties. I believe the benefit to the health and vibrancy of the City of Bremerton is worth supporting, and I urge you to consider offering fee options similar to those in other cities in our Puget Sound region. Best regards, Beverly Kincaid From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:54 AM To: 'Aznoneisbusy .' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Anonymous) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: Aznoneisbusy. . [mailto:aznoneisbusy@gmaii.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2017 12:19 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Neighborhood Block Party I support Huddy's $25 block party ordinance plan From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:57 AM To: 'Jean Schanen' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Jean Schanen) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Schanen, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 88 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. z ine &MM&P Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: Jean Schanen [mailto:jean.schanen@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 9:05 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: let us have block parties! Please vote for Councilman Huddy's proposed ordinance making block parties possible at reasonable cost. Promoting strong friendly relations among our citizens can do our city nothing but good. From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:59 AM To: 'Alison Loris' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Alison Loris) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Loris, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as apart of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov „4 P From: Alison Loris [mailto:asloris@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 9:32 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Parties Dear Councillors, Summer block parties are a great way to build a sense of community. They've been shown to help make our neighborhoods safer because when people recognize their neighbors, they can more easily spot suspicious activity that shoud be reported to police. Often just calling out to someone, "Hello. I know the people who live in that house, and I don't know you" is enough to discourage prowlers, mail thieves and so on. Other Washington cities, including Poulsbo, Seattle, Kirkland, and Vancouver, encourage block parties by a simple application process and a nominal fee. Bremerton, on the 1 other hand, demands a total of $450 to $550 in fees and insurance from neighborhood residents seeking to hold a block party. This effectively limits block parties to wealthy neighborhoods -- which is too bad, because the crime reduction effect is needed especially in low- and -middle-income districts. Please give your serious consideration to Richard Huddy's proposal to adopt a more reasonable and affordable model, such as Kirkland's - and let the parties begin! Alison Slow Loris Writer & Adventuress Bremerton, WA "All we ever have is here, now." Ursula K. Le Guin 2 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 12:03 PM To: 'Michael Bencik' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Mike Bencik) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. Bencik, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 86 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. x[6birte &Pwuez Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.gov -1 r� -----Original Message ----- From: Michael Bencik [mailto:seaspider@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:08 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Partys I think that Bremerton should make it easier and less expensive to have a neighborhood block party. Regards, Mike Bencik Sent from XFINITY Connect Mobile App From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 12:05 PM To: 'Sabrina Huddy' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Sabrina Huddy) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mrs. Huddy, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: Sabrina Huddy [mailto:sabrinahuddy@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:33 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Proposed Block Party Ordinance Council Members, I would like to encourage you to vote for the Proposed Block Party Ordinance that is being modeled after the Kirkland model. However, I prefer the Seattle model. Neighborhood gatherings are not a commercial event and should not be charged the same price as commercial vendors for a Special Event permit. We are not making any money here or raising money for a cause. We are getting together to connect with our neighbors to discuss neighborhood issue and finding ways to make our neighborhood and city a better place to live. This is a community building event, not a commercial event. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Sabrina Huddy 1121 N Montgomery Ave Bremerton WA 98312 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 12:12 PM To: 'coolrayn coolrayn' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Christina Williams) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Williams, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 86 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.aov -----Original Message ----- From: coolrayn coolrayn [mailto:coolrayn@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:28 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Concern with event permit costs in Bremerton Hello, my name is Christina and I have been a resident of Bremerton for over 25 years. It has recently been brought to my attention the staggering costs for friendly neighbors to try to create a sense of community and friendship by hosting a block party. Unfortunately, it is a rare thing this day in age for neighbors to meet and get to know each other. What a wonderful and safe way for our families to connect! Even more unfortunate is that our city makes it pretty impossible, with application fees ($100), liability insurance ($350) and a street closure fee ($100). It is understandable that closing down a side street is not such an easy task and there are saftey concerns. But how is it that the city of Kirkland can provide this service to their residents for a minimal fee of $25 without issue? I would urge the Bremerton City Council to re look at their model and see if there is any way we can lower the costs for local, family fun events such as these. I feel it is so important to support any form of community bonding. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Christina Williams From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 12:14 PM To: 'Missouri Steve' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties ("Missouri" Steve) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Steve, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 88 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.aov From: Missouri Steve [mailto:missouwashfornia@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 11:51 AM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Bremerton Block Parties! IbHello City Council, Our neighborhoods would like to have block parties this summer (and beyond) but are discouraged by the high costs imposed by the City. Under the City of Bremerton's special event permit procedure, residents who organize a neighborhood block party are required to pay $100 for the application fee, $250-350 for liability insurance, and up to $100 for street closure or a park reservation. $450-550 seems unreasonable to me. When discussing this with one of my neighbors a question of how much liability is covered for that $250-350 cost? Please examine any alternatives that may be equally as good for us Bremertonians. I've learned through the tiny, tiny Bremerton grapevine that Councilman Richard Huddy presented an alternative plan, modeled on the ordinance in place in the City of Kirkland, allowing neighborhoods to have block parties, including street closure, for the nominal fee of $25! Holy Sh*t, right?! Lets do that! Kirkland has been using the ordinance for years without difficulty. Other cities, like Poulsbo, Seattle and Vancouver, encourage block parties with easy applications and minimal fees. So why cant we? Kind Regards, District 4 -Steve A. FA From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 12:17 PM To: 'AMYBREMERTON' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Amy Burnett and Earl Sand) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Burnett and Mr. Sand, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 88 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your suggestion and comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: AMYBREMERTON [mailto:amybremerton@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 4, 2017 8:30 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: neighborhoods Dear Council Persons: I have had several folks talk to me about loving where they live in Bremerton and getting together with neighbors for various activities or socials. We really like our house on upper Washington Ave. and have enjoyed many socials with our friends and neighbors. Looking into sidewalk and street codes, restrictions, permits, requirements and fees for simple neighborhood get togethers seems complicated and pricy. These activities are very important for a healthy Bremerton and I feel it should be encouraged, especially in the wake of so many apartments and condos overshadowing our downtown quaint neighborhoods. What about an annual designated "neighborhood week", where the city offers special concessions? Amy Burnett and Earl Sande From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:09 PM To: geneh@silverlink.net' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Comments - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Gene David Hart) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. Hart, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: geneh@silverlink.net [mailto:geneh@silverlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 12:53 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Neighborhood Block Parties Dear Bremerton City Councilmembers, Respective to Neighborhood Block Parties, 1. My concern is Neighborhood Block Parties disturb neighborhood peace and tranquility, much like loud house parties, loud music, loud television, loud heat pumps et cetera. Our neighbors deserve relaxation, relief, respite, rest, and/or sleep, after their 8 to 5, swing or graveyard hours of work, exercise et cetera. In other words, I fully support our neighbors' rights to peaceful and safe enjoyment of their homes, personal property, dignity et cetera. 2. 1 believe, our parks are the appropriate places for Neighborhood Block Parties. In other words, I fully support our neighbors' right to reserve space for such gatherings in our parks for a nominal fee, in accordance with posted safe and otherwise civil behavior. 3. If we do not have enough parks for such gatherings, I fully support using our resources to create more such amenities. Sincerely. Gene David Hart Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:13 PM To: 'Kurt Nelson' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Kurt Nelson) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. Nelson, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 813 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. xi6t�ine &max Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov 114 -----Original Message ----- From: Kurt Nelson [mailto:kurtfnelson@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 1:23 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Party Fee Reduction Hello City Council, Our neighborhoods would like to have block parties this summer but are discouraged by the high costs imposed by the City. Under the City of Bremerton's special event permit procedure, residents who organize a neighborhood block party are required to pay $100 for the application fee, $250-350 for liability insurance, and up to $100 for street closure or a park reservation. $450-550 seems unreasonable to me. Councilman Richard Huddy presented an alternative plan, modeled on the ordinance in place in the City of Kirkland, allowing neighborhoods to have block parties, including street closure, for the nominal fee of $25. Kirkland has been using the ordinance for years without difficulty. Other cities, like Poulsbo, Seattle and Vancouver, encourage block parties with easy applications and minimal fees. Block parties and neighborhood watches have proven to reduce crime and help neighborhoods to be safer and more tolerant. We moved from Ballard about 15 months ago and greatly miss our neighborhood get together. Kind Regards, Kurt Nelson 1620 Pitt Avenue Bremerton, WA 98310 Sent from my iPhone From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:16 PM To: 'Drayton Djackson' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Drayton Jackson) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Mr. Jackson, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 813 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov A a From: Drayton Djackson [ma ilto:Drayton. DJackson@outlook.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 1:34 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Party To Member of Bremerton's City Council: Growing up in Brownsville Brooklyn, one of the most dangerous places to live, I witness my share of gang activities, drug dealing and violence. In 1989, a lady (whose name escapes me right now), got a permit to throw a party on the block where her house was located. It was three blocks away from the projects I grew up in. She worked with the local PAL (Police Athletic League) to sponsor trampolines for the children to jump on; she worked with the local ice cream man to give out free ice cream to us; and she worked with a local restaurant to serve us food. People, who on an average day I could not talk or play with because of gang affiliations or because they lived in different areas, were at this block party. As a child, it was one of my favorite memories living in that crime ridden area, because what I saw was communities come together. This block party represented unity. As Bremerton grows and people from different parts of the country, like myself, start to call Bremerton home, what is important to understand is the diversity of the cultures. Making block parties easier to have in Bremerton will bring communities together and people will benefit from throwing a block party where they live. An Asian mother who wants to have a birthday party child in their culture can invite the child's friends from different backgrounds to experience that cultures norms. A pacific islander father who wants to show his neighbors how islanders bar-b-que is different can do that with a block party. If a Caucasian man wants to show his love for his country and community and invite his neighbors he can with a block party. I urge city council to consider and understand that making a block party easier helps make your constituents come together as one community. I thank the members of city council for your time. Sincerely Drayton Jackson "it is not the strongest of the species that survive nor the Most intelligent, but the ones most responsive to change" Charles Darwin 2 Christine Grenier From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:21 PM To: 'Faye Flemister' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Faye Flemister) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Faye, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 86 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. �xr.6t�2e �x9niex Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: Faye Flemister [mailto:faflemisterl@gmaii.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 1:58 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Neighborhood block Party Greetings Council President Younger and Council members I am sending this email to stand in support of reconsidering the cost to neighborhoods for block parties. I understand that there is going to be a presentation tonight outlining how the cost could possibly be lowered. I am unable to be there tonight -but I would like to say that if at all possible lets do what we can to make the cost more economical for our neighbors to host block parties. I know that the entire council is in support of neighborhoods getting together and knowing their neighbors in their neighborhood. I appreciate your efforts tonight for consideration on this matter. Thank you Faye Flemister Faye Flemister Moving Forward From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:24 PM To: 'Jaime Forsyth' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Comments - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Jaime Forsyth) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Forsyth, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 813 on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent; City Attorney; and Financial Services Director. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. iGtone Ofpwuez Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.eov From: Jaime Forsyth [mailto:jaimeforsyth@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:08 PM To: City Council<City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Cc: Patty Lent <Patty.Lent@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Re: Block parties Fixed a small typo. Please refer to this version. On Wednesday, 5 July 2017, Jaime Forsyth <jaimefors tthh@gLnail.com> wrote: City Council, I am commenting on the issue of block party fees. First of all, please consider that there are two types of block parties - 1. A public block party, such as the one Star of the Sea puts on every year, for which it seems reasonable for the City to hold them accountable to a higher level, e.g. including insurance, service provided by the City, etc. I am not talking about them. 2. Private block parties. This is where there is no commercial involvement and it is not open to the public. It is about neighbors gathering together to celebrate community connections and make our city safer, more welcoming and a nicer place to live. We can have bouncy castles in a backyard, kids doing chalk art on a sidewalk, neighbors grilling in their yards, and tables and chairs set up in the biggest yard for everyone to gather and eat together. None of this requires a permit. But, what would enhance it would be if we can put up a barricade at the accessible ends of a non -arterial block to keep everyone SAFER, rather than have non -local traffic coming through when there is a high likelihood of children running back and forth between houses and not paying attention to traffic. If the neighborhood notified the City of their private event and borrowed/rented barricades from the City, the police should also be notified so that, if possible, a neighborhood officer could stop by to do some community building. Ask Chief Strachan --- this would be a good thing for everyone to build more and better relationships with our local police. Again, this is not a City event that should require an exorbitant set of fees that will guarantee that no neighborhood will reasonably involve the City. It will look like our City Council doesn't care about neighborhoods and our safety. At this point, there are so few neighborhoods that are connected enough to be likely candidates for a block party that the Mayor and City Council should probably send them a thank you note for making our city better, rather than hitting them with exorbitant fees that will kill the event. Also, in further consideration of this issue, can you please verify how much Star of the Sea has been paying to the City in block party related fees for their annual event? In the event they have not been paying, it would of course be completely unreasonable to charge tax payers for block parties if the fees are being waived for non - tax payers. If the City feels that it simply must charge something, I think that a token rental fee of $25 would be appropriate, or maybe just a deposit to make sure the City gets the barricades back. Good neighbors and good communities are one of the best assets a city can have. Celebrate them; don't penalize them! Thank you for your consideration on this matter. Sincerely, Jaime Forsyth 1510 10th St. "Be the change that you wish to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi "Be the change that you wish to see in the world." Mahatma Gandhi From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 3:44 PM To: 'Charlene Deuscher' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Charlene Deuscher} Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. Deuscher, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney. Thank you for taking the time to share your comments. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton Gty Council (360) 473-5280 Citv.Councii@ci. bre merton.wa.us www.BremertonWA,gov From: Charlene Deuscher imailto:clbd72@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 2:46 PM To: City Council CCity.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Block Party I think the City of Bremerton need to recognize it's citizens as a community and needs to encourage activities such as block parties with out exorbitant fees and unrealistic regulations. Thank You, Charlene L. Deutscher 1301 N. Montgomery Ave. Bremerton, WA 98312 360-521-4386 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 3:47 PM To: 'J EAN NA DAM ERON" Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Comments - Ordinance relating to Block Parties (Jeanna Dameron) Attachments: JULY 5, 2017.pdf Ms. ❑arneron, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has been provided to the Council Members for their review and consideration. It will also be included as a part of the record under General Business Item 8B on the attached agenda: B. Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" relating to Neighborhood Block Parties Due to the subject matter, your e-mail was also shared with Mayor Lent and the City Attorney, Thank you for taking the time to share your comments and suggestions. (&�- id (V Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 City.CouncilOci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA. ov From: JEANNA DAMERON [mailto:jdameOO1@odu.edu] Sent: Wednesday, July 5, 2017 3:29 PM To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: Event permit fees To: Bremerton City Council Members, As Community Relations Director for the Key Peninsula Bishoff Foodbank, it has come to my attention that large fees are required to facilitate a block party or special event in the city limits of Bremerton. Comparing application costs of neighboring cities, Bremerton's fees are double those of Port Orchard's (50$) regardless of the event. To have a neighborhood block party in Seattle is free of charge. Otherwise, a special event permit varies depending on the event and the resources requested from the city. Last summer I helped coordinate the Gimme Shelter event (Aug. 13, 2016) which was a successful event. We have had to consider having the next one in city other than Bremerton. The event was to bring community members together while building awareness of homelessness. I use this event as an example because this is exactly the type of event that the community needs. Plus, I can speak from experience. Nothing was sold at the event. Food permits were obtained and there was no alcohol. I propose that Bremerton revise the application process; creating one for block parties and one for events. Aside from insurance (which my agent states is minimal in cost) and food permits there should not be fees unless it is an event with vendors and extra police presence is needed. Events should have a fee scale such as Seattle. The Key Peninsula Bishoff Foodbank is staffed 100% by volunteers. Our bills are paid by donations and fundraising. We serve all hungry people regardless of what county they live in. For these reasons, we are unable to pay 400$ to 540$ for the neighborhood block party that we had hoped to have this summer. Our goal was to get to know our neighboring communities. The city will lose money as events are held outside of Bremerton or not held at all. Thank you very much for your time. Best Wishes, Jeanna Dameron YWCA Advocate, Community Relations Director: Key peninsula Bishoff Foodbank, Criminal Justice Major, Concerned citizen V) LU CL 0 .0 0 Ln Z > ctl- o V EL D L ar N (n 0 U - cc = a Q J 'all n = m rr 2' T Q LL. LL. ~ LL LL LL a F- F- F H j H H H o U q~ ay 3, Y N O Lf) ico E u .-i m .� N m Ln '� c O It r rc V) m !! m C 06 m N � � r• bo Ln C] o Ln u) � M +; 0 7t O fV N N In O 0 C 0 O �� w O r nJ Cq rl 1- r-i N m co m m N .-i rl rl O Q CXYn 3 O rN-i d Q Om O •--i �-1 � N � O O O � p C3 �..� ,J d N ri .-i c-I O N n N N N �, �? n m m In T s 0 G rwi r-i rti n N ti r i r i..� _ ri ri ri '�"� 5--i ti ti co T Q NLL N r O Q N N N 41 w Ln o N n Y N Ln N Q1 Q7 O1 L R ++ 3 � V tkcp Cj Q z —3r 7 7 ] O T O Q a= e a Q NbiO r, N Ep L o r 0 N 0 N a c � a N C4 CLi r4 N N N Ln cry v a N N ` q GJ O moi. Q) m C 2 y ¢ C j ry v O 7 Y CL - Crcl -0 V7 �-+ 'F1 L] O r f6 N O ro o _a a 3? m +� r Li t v v y o m o C) a _ �.il W z U z U O O Y NTi d n ❑ Q 2 � z Lr} Ln N O O O ;,i rr O O N 0 Ln O +n E O CJS. ■ N oo 1.0 o Ln a :r ro m r-, -1 o rW N _ �r.i► Q N Y1 N rw Q5 N f' r e-V S7 aJ n7 h O 4-- O ? 7 O N Lu FAY] Ul 72 m 00 errt' C c 61 O GO O L7 6J W I Q � i•+ �"� E a. O2 p co aj CL C W L 0 w O 0 43'L Q cr7 ) N 3 M? u a m o m 3 0 o J ?- Z m L1 Z SG m Y d Q ~ It I lxcg MW Lnluj coo iW ul L 0 LLI F. LU u W A vi u w wE N qn N zay !. z L" w l��° � Z61m am W, Lo mm < J J 06 M #� C it +y u Z [, La d rLa w�+ a 22 � J Ln z � w� {,p >. L LC a W vi m ui c V. I u W A vi u w wE N qn N zay !. z L" w l��° � Z61m am W, Lo mm < J J �. w � � ,�, e 1 � � r 1 W d. w �w� �. • ► � �Iw LU {) W 0 a_ Q � CI Q CCS N V'S Z � a Z Q` � 1= W LU W LL1 i Z Q O Q W m Q m Z L6J cc CA ad W Q m v m r W 1, i� a o c c o N i1)- N (A -v)- a a m L xLn •�x + •v, + r� as m CLO aQ as M +- FA m 41 a � a o � � a a a a a U m .� "Q u H C a c a•o o cm �i cn a •E c ° d a � °o a Zdi a as cm ii in a N m r 00 �O c V? lU `- C o o p 0 V p p �acn0za LL I Am t ` 1 417 �,, ".41.1 r 'f 4 -LLJ rcs � Am t ` 1 417 �,, ".41.1 r 'f 4 LIM I �M t ���lllii ! rf/l�fi /ff ti�� ME r ,°� Y ___ ,_ ' °r"�