The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07/19/2017 AGENDA PACKETCITY COUNCIL 345 6th Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337 - Phone (360) 473-5280 J U LY 19, 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. PUBLIC RECOGNITION 5. CONSENT AGENDA A. Claims & Check Register B. Minutes of Meeting — July 5, 2017 C. Minutes of Study Session — July 12, 2017 D. Purchase of 12.5% Bulk Sodium Hypochlorite Solution from JCI Jones, Inc. of Tacoma, WA for the Westside Wastewater Treatment Plant E. Ordinance No. 5329 to amend Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) Section 13.04.140 entitled "Liquor (Beer and Wine)" under the Park Code 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Public Hearing on Resolution No. 3292 to amend Department of Financial Services - Rate Table A relating to Fees for Public Records B. Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 5330 to amend Section 20.46.010 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) regarding "Accessory Dwelling Units" 7. GENERAL BUSINESS A. Ordinance No. 5331 to amend Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter 11.08 entitled "Sidewalk and Street Frontage" B. Acceptance of Lodging Tax Advisory Committee's Recommendations for Fiscal Year 2018 Funding Allocations 8. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS 9. 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. 4-J O E 4-1 U-004-1 a � 3 i C CCO 4 Ln Y 3 o � o 7q* ,fyR Rt s rJP/ Fm: U d a 0000"WN W O r N LO N 4� F Co 0 I,*- M U E O V a)Co Q � O - O o � p O � M jeflIoAA woi Aq §oloqd P 0 ` a� \\yx� \/\�\,~ CD cm cm cc Q r cm cru ]C CL. Z 4 C'L C/! LV Z" O Li CD a cn V CC CL. 4 m� mmol s� 00 W b95'9v$ 0 bL0"6Z$ C L O U 0 o 00-Y WU CL N Q -l[ � CR 0 7 W �-C a `_ O L a~ G O C ro C W C U L 10 0 c`iy 7 r a � Z W �L O. YM �L v 6 c: lop C >' ti EL O+-rO Cgow LS0U) E C C C cu (a O �' � V 1✓ U BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKERS LIST REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO THE CLERK THANK YOU 7 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Claims & Check Register SUMMARY: 5A Study Session Date: N/A COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 19, 2017 Department: Financial Services Presenter: Shannon Corin Phone: (360)473-5323 Approval of the following checks and electronic fund transfers: 1) Check #'s 374388 through 374567 and EFT's 17510 through 17565 in the amount of $3,111,926.29; and 2) Regular Payroll for the pay period ending June 30, 2017 in the amount of $812,495.15; 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 — July 5, 2017 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL Study Session Date: N/A COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 19, 2017 Department: City Council Presenter: Council President Phone: (360)473-5280 SUMMARY: Attached is the summary of the City Council Meeting on July 5, 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, July 5, 2017 The weekly meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order Wednesday, July 5, 2017, at 5:00 PM in Council Conference Room 603 of the NORM DICKS GOVERNMENT CENTER, 345 6t" Street, Bremerton, Washington, with Council President Eric Younger presiding. Council Members present were Richard Huddy, Dino Davis, Greg Wheeler, Jerry McDonald, Leslie Daugs, and Pat Sullivan. 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. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Pat Sullivan followed by the Invocation provided by Pastor Eric Roberts of Discovery Fellowship. MAYOR'S REPORT — Mayor Lent announced the following • Was pleased to report that the revenues received from permits for the Month of June were double the amount received from the Month of May; • Proclaimed the Month of July 2017 as "Parks & Recreation Month"; and invited Cynthia Engelgau, Holly Peterson, and Scott Evans from the Parks & Recreation Department to receive the proclamation and announce upcoming events including Fun at the Playgrounds through August 4 at Blueberry Park, Kiwanis Park, and the Manette Playfield; the West Sound Senior Games from July 12 to 15; and a variety of on-going athletic leagues; • Brought forward Parks & Recreation Director Jeff Elevado and Public Works & Utilities Director Chal Martin to display the Municipal Excellence Award that was presented to the City of Bremerton at the AWC Annual Conference for work done at Lillian A. & James Walker Park; • Brought forward Kathleen Cahall, Water Resources Manager to display the 2017 Exemplary Source Water Protection Award for a Medium System that was presented to the City of Bremerton's Public Works & Utilities Department by the American Water Works Association; • Shared the schedules for Rock the Dock and Music in Manette Summer Concert Series; • Encouraged attendance at the "Walk a Mile in Her Shoes Walk & Family Fun Fair" that will be held on Saturday, July 8 from 3:00 to 5:00 PM at Evergreen Rotary Park; • Community volunteers are needed for the 2017 Summer "Point in Time" Homeless Count; • The Kitsap Chordsmen will be performing "Scandimania" on Saturday, July 15 at 2:00 and 7:00 PM in the North Kitsap Auditorium located at 1881 NE Hostmark in Poulsbo; and • A local family (with no cats or dogs due to her allergies) is still needed to host "Kanon", a 17 - year old exchange student from the City of Bremerton's Sister City Kure, Japan for 4 -weeks from July 24 to August 20, and to please contact the Mayor's Office at (360) 473-5266 if interested. FIRE DEPARTMENT BRIEFING Fire Chief David Schmitt reported on fireworks -related issues and statistics from over the 4t" of July weekend; and then introduced Captain Brian Marceau, Lieutenant Brian Junkin, Captain Dan Mustard, Lieutenant Craig Patti, and Training Battalion Chief John Payne. POLICE DEPARTMENT BRIEFING Police Chief Steve Strachan used a Power Point presentation to highlight trends, statistics, and police activity for the Months of June through early July; and brought forward Police Officer Chris Faidley who introduced new K-9 Officer Esco. City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes Wednesday, July 5, 2017 Page 2 of 4 PUBLIC RECOGNITION — There were no comments or questions by members of the public... CONSENT AGENDA 7A— Claims & Check Register: Check Numbers 374198 through 374387 and EFT -17468 through EFT -17509 in the amount of $2,844,617.11; Regular Payroll (Pay Out) for the pay period ending June 15, 2017 in the amount of $7,390.09; and Retiree Payroll for the pay period ending June 30, 2017 in the amount of $49,379.04 7B— Minutes of Meeting —June 21, 2017 7C — Minutes of Study Session — June 28, 2017 7D — Authorize Hiring of David Johnson, Building Official at Pay Band 15, Rate 6 of the 2017 Management, Professional, Confidential & Fiduciary Salary Plan 7E — Ordinance No. 5327 to repeal and replace Ordinance No. 5300 regarding the 2016 Shoreline Limited Amendments to the Shoreline Master Program 7F — Mutual Aid Agreement for the Provision of Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services 7G — Professional Services Agreement with the Bremerton School District for a Full-time School Resource Officer 7H — Purchase of a John Deere 45OKLT Crawler Dozer from Pape Machinery, Inc. of Tacoma, WA for the Forestry Division 71— Agreement with Golden Eagle Evergreens for the Removal and Sale of Minor Forest Products 7J — Commercial Line Extension Agreement with Puget Sound Energy for Pump Station KL -2 David Johnson discussed his background, stated that he looks forward to his position as Building Official for the City of Bremerton, and that his family also looks forward to being a part of the community. There were no comments or questions by members of the public... 06:25:10 M/S/C/U (Davis/Daugs) Move to approve the CONSENT AGENDA as presented. GENERAL BUSINESS 8A — PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BMcCONSULTING LLC FOR LOBBYING SERVICES: City Attorney Roger Lubovich summarized that this Consulting Agreement with BMcConsulting LLC will provide lobbying services from July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018. There were no comments or questions by members of the public... 06:27:10 Motion was made by Daugs and seconded by Sullivan... Comments were provided by Daugs, Sullivan, Wheeler, Davis, and Huddy... Additional comments were added by Mayor Lent... 06:36:56 M/S/C (Daugs/Sullivan) 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. Voted in favor of Motion: Daugs, McDonald, Davis, Huddy, Sullivan, Younger Voted opposed to Motion: Wheeler Motion carried: 6 -Yes; 1 -No City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes Wednesday, July 5, 2017 Page 3 of 4 8B — ORDINANCE NO. 5328 AMENDING CHAPTER 5.36 OF THE BREMERTON MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED "SPECIAL EVENTS": Council Member Richard Huddy stated that the proposed ordinance amends Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 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. Further details were elaborated by City Attorney Roger Lubovich. Citizens who spoke in support of the proposed Ordinance were Lisa Packett, Jean Shannon, Naomi Evans, Amanda Smith, Fred Baker, Jo Walter, Carol Wilkerson, Donald Mathews, Adam Brockus, and Mary Lou Long... 07:10:00 Motion was made by Huddy, and seconded by Wheeler... Comments and questions were provided by Huddy, Wheeler, Davis, Daugs, Sullivan, McDonald, and Younger ... with responses provided by Parks & Recreation Director Jeff Elevado and City Attorney Roger Lubovich... Rebuttal comments were added by Davis, Daugs, Wheeler, Davis (3rd), Huddy, and Daugs (3rd) ... Closing comments and questions were made by Younger, with responses received by Mr. Lubovich and Mayor Lent... Mr. Lubovich read a proposed amendment to the Ordinance (last sentence to Section 1, Chapter 5.36.080): "These events are held and attended by people living in the neighborhood surrounding the street, they are not intended to be open to the general public" President Younger asked if there was any objection to the proposed amendment to the Ordinance. With no objections, the amendment to the Ordinance was adopted, and the Motion was amended. 07:58:40 A-M/S/C (Huddy/Wheeler) Move to pass Ordinance No. 5328 to amend Chapter 5.36 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Events" as amended; and establishing a $25 street closure fee for neighborhood block parties for 2017. Voted in favor of Motion: McDonald, Wheeler, Huddy, Younger Voted opposed to Motion: Davis, Sullivan, Daugs Motion carried: 4 -Yes; 3 -No COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Pat Sullivan thanked organizers of the 1St Annual Bremerton Bridge Blast event held last Saturday off of the Manette Bridge; and announced that volunteers are welcome for the next Lions Park Monthly Work Party on Saturday, July 8 from 10:00 AM to Noon. Leslie Daugs announced the schedule for the 2017 Summer Lunch Program; shared that registration is now open for the YMCA Summer Camp at the Bremerton Family YMCA; announced the Back to School Fair & Fun Run will be on August 15 from 5:00 to 7:00 PM at Mountain View Middle School; invited the community to the Kitsap Pride Festival on Saturday, July 15 from 11:00 AM to 5:00 PM at Evergreen Rotary Park and Pride Party on Friday, July 14 at 9:00 PM in the Fountain Room at Bremerton Harborside; enjoyed attending the Chimacum Community Celebration, noting that reservations can be made online for regular service that begins on July 10 Jerry McDonald reported the 1St Annual Bremerton Bridge Blast off of the Manette Bridge was a huge success; looked forward to Bremerton Summer Brewfest on July 14 & 15; and shared the schedules for both Rock the Dock and Music in Manette Summer Concert Series. Richard Huddy thanked members of the community who attended the meeting tonight and expressed their support for the Block Party Ordinance; reported on his attendance at the Association of Washington Cities Annual Conference with Council President Younger and Vice City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes Wednesday, July 5, 2017 Page 4 of 4 President McDonald that was held in Vancouver, WA; and also enjoyed attending the 1St Annual Bremerton Bridge Blast fireworks show; the Chimacum Community Celebration; and the Story Walk hosted by Josh Farley of the Kitsap Sun. Lastly, he challenged his fellow male Council Members to don a pair of high heels and join him in the "6`" Annual Walk A Mile in Her Shoes" (Walk to End Domestic Violence in Kitsap County) event in support of YWCA Kitsap County services for victims of domestic violence and their children to be held on Saturday, July 8 from 3:00 to 5:00 PM at Evergreen Rotary Park. Eric Younger reported that he too attended the Association of Washington Cities Annual Conference in Vancouver, WA, and since it was his first time, he was not sure what to expect but he was pleasantly surprised at how much he enjoyed it. He was pleased to find it very informative as well as productive. With no further business, President Younger adjourned the Council Meeting at 8:13 PM. Prepared and Submitted by: LORI SMITH Legislative Assistant APPROVED by the City Council on the 19th day of July, 2017. ERIC YOUNGER, City Council President ATTEST: SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk EY:SC:ls:cg SUBJECT: Minutes of Study Session — July 12, 2017 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 5C Study Session Date COUNCIL MEETING Date Department Presenter Phone N/A July 19, 2017 City Council Council President (360) 473-5280 SUMMARY: Attached is the summary of the City Council Study Session on July 12, 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, July 12, 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, July 12, 2017, at 5:00 PM, with Council President Eric Younger presiding. Council Members present were Richard Huddy, Dino Davis, Greg Wheeler, Jerry McDonald, Leslie Daugs, and Pat Sullivan. Christine Grenier, Council Assistant, was present to provide staff support. President Younger emphasized that the Study Session was open to the public but there would be no opportunities for input or participation; no action is anticipated; and the content of these items is subject to change. It was further announced that items approved by the Council will be placed on the July 19, 2017 Council Meeting Agenda or as indicated. A. INFORMATION BRIEFING 1. Update on the 2017 Legislative Special Sessions — Brian McConaughy, BMcConsulting Information only 2. Bremerton Kitsap Access Television Succession Plan — Charleen Burnette, BKAT Manager Information only B. NO PRESENTATION PLANNED — The following items are budgeted items orsubjects that have been raised with the appropriate Council Committee Members... 1. Purchase of 12.5% Sodium Hypochlorite Solution from JCI Jones, Inc. of Tacoma, WA for the Westside Wastewater Treatment Plant Consent Agenda 2. Ordinance to amend Chapter 11.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) entitled "Sidewalk and Street Frontage" General Business 3. Ordinance to amend Section 13.04.140 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) entitled "Liquor' under the Park Code Consent Agenda 4. Proposed Public Hearing on a Resolution to amend the Department of Financial Services — Rate Table A relating to Fees for Public Records Public Hearing President Younger announced that the order of the following items was changed to begin with Item C3... C. BRIEFINGS & FULL PRESENTATIONS 1. Update on Puget Sound Regional Council's "Regional Centers Framework" Information Only 2. Proposed Public Hearing and Ordinance to amend Section 20.46.010 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) regarding "Accessory Dwelling Units" Public Hearing 3. Acceptance of the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee's Recommendations for Fiscal Year 2018 Funding Allocations General Business D. GENERAL COUNCIL BUSINESS o Public Works Committee Briefing (7/11/17 Meeting) — Vice -Chair Jerry McDonald o Public Safety & Parks Committee Briefing (7/12/17 Meeting) — Chair Leslie Daugs o Other General Council Business was briefly discussed. City Council Study Session Minutes Wednesday, July 12, 2017 Page 2 of 2 With no further business, President Younger adjourned the Council Study Session at 8:11 PM. Prepared and Submitted by: CHRISTINE GRENIER, Council Assistant APPROVED by the City Council on the 19th 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: Purchase of 12.5% Bulk Sodium Hypochlorite Solution from JCI Jones, Inc. of Tacoma, WA for the Westside Wastewater Treatment Plant 401 Study Session Date: July 12, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Julv 19. 2017 Department: Presenter: Phone: PW&U / WWTP Pat Coxon (360) 473-5448 SUMMARY: Four proposals were received in response to a request from the City for furnishing 12.5% bulk sodium hypochlorite to the Westside WWTP. JCI Jones INC., Tacoma, WA submitted the lowest responsive proposal at $0.80/gallon delivered, which includes freight and taxes. This award to the supplier will have firm pricing for a period of one year, from the time the proposal agreement is signed. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Sodium Hypochlorite proposals from HASA Inc.; JCI Jones Chemicals Inc.; Northstar Chemical; and Univar BCS. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): This purchase is budgeted through the WWTP Operating Supplies budget of $550,000.00. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: 0 No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑x Consent Agenda ❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the proposal to purchase bulk 12.5% sodium hypochlorite solution for a period of one year from JCI Jones INC at a cost of $0.80 per gallon delivered and authorize the Wastewater Manager to make these purchases on an as needed basis. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action Chemical Proposals for the City of Bremerton — 2017 Sodium Hypochlorite: Cost Per/Gal. Delivered I. HASA INC. = $ 0.878 (MIN. 4,700 GAL. DELIVERY) / LOW SALT DELIVERY = $ 0.898 (MIN. 4700 GAL. DELIVERY) 2. NORTHSTAR CHEMICALS INC. = $1.320 (>2,000 GAL. DELIVERY) $2.080 (< 2,000 GAL. DELIVERY) /LOW SALT DELIVERY = $1.430 (>2,000 GAL. DELIVERY) $3.550 (<2,000 GAL. DELIVERY) 3. JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC. = $0.800 (4800 GAL. DELIVERY) 4. TWO RIVERS = N/A 5. UNIVAR BCS = $1.079 (4500 GAL. DELIVERY) $2.060 (< 1001 GAL. DELIVERY) Sodium Hydroxide: Cost Per/Gal. Delivered 1. HASA INC. = $ N/A 2. NORTHSTAR CHEMICALS INC. = $2.660 (>2,000 GAL. DELIVERY) $3.530 (< 2,000 GAL. DELIVERY) 3. JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC. = $2.970 (1000 GAL. DELIVERY) 4. TWO RIVERS = N/A 5. UNIVAR BCS = $2.539 ( 4,000 GAL. DELIVERY) $ 3.073 ( 250 GAL. DELIVERY) Sodium Bi Sulfite: Cost Per/Gal. Delivered 1. HASA INC. = $ N/A 2. NORTHSTAR CHEMICALS INC. = $2.110 (1500 GAL. DELIVERY) 3. JCI JONES CHEMICAL INC. = $ 4. TWO RIVERS = $2.45 (1500 GAL. DELIVERY) 5. Univar BCS = $2.812 (3500 GAL. DELIVERY) From: Patric Coxon Sent: Monday, 3uly 10, 2017 6:17 AM To: Hillary Hamilton Subject: FW: 2017 Chemical Proposals for City of Bremerton WWTP - JCI Jones Proposal Importance: High Good Morning Hillary, Amanda from Legal had sent an email to me saying I should include the actual low proposal for the Hypochlorite agenda bill. Below is the submitted proposal. Could you load this onto agenda pal or is it too late? Please let me know. Thanks. Patric J Coxon Wastewater/Forestry Manager Public Works & Utilities City of Bremerton 360.473.5448 From: Michelle Trammell[mailto:mtrammell(d)jcichem.com] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 12:57 PM To: Larry Willman Cc: James Groh; Patric Coxon Subject: 2017 Chemical Proposals for City of Bremerton WWTP - JCI Jones Proposal Importance: High Hello Larry, JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc. is pleased to bid the following for 2017 Chemical Proposals for the City of Bremerton WWTP: 12.5% SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE (4800 gal/Delivery): $0.80/gal 50% MEMBRANE CAUSTIC SODA (1000 gal/Delivery): $2.97/gal Both prices include sales tax, freight and any hazardous fees. Please note that these bid prices are for the Wastewater Location ONLY at 1600 Oyster Bay Ave. S., Bremerton, WA 98312. Let me know if you have any questions. We appreciate the opportunity to work with the City of Bremerton. Please confirm receipt of email. Thank You, Tra*"*"t�k Office Manager & Sales Coordinator JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc. 1919 Marine View Drive Tacoma, WA 98422 (253) 274 - 0104/ph (253) 274-0733/fax mtrammell(@icichem.com AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL 5E SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 5329 to amend Study Session Date: July 12, 2017 Section 13.04.140 of the Bremerton COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 19, 2017 Municipal Code (BMC) entitled "Liquor" Department: PW&U under the Park Code Presenter: Milenka Hawkins -Bates - Phone: (360) 473-5333 SUMMARY: The proposed revisions to the Bremerton Municipal Code outline the changes requested to allow liquor for private events within the boundaries of Otto Jarstad Park. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Ordinance No. 5329 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. 5329 to amend Section 13.04.140 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Liquor" under the Park Code. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action Form Updated 01/07/15 ORDINANCE NO. 5329 AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, amending Section 13.04.140 of the Bremerton Municipal Code relating to liquor in City Parks. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Section 13.04.14 entitled "Liquor" under the Park Code relating to alcohol within Otto Jarstad Park; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION]. Section 13.04.140 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Liquor" under the Park Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 13.04.140 LIQUOR. It is unlawful to serve or consume, within any City park, any liquor as defined in RCW 66.04.010(25), as enacted and hereinafter amended, except the service and consumption of liquor is authorized in the following circumstances: (a) Harborside Fountain Park and Louis Mentor Boardwalk. Within the boundaries of the Harborside Fountain Park and the Louis Mentor Boardwalk when: (1) Permitted by the Washington State Liquor Control Board; and (2) Such service of liquor is administered by the operator of the Kitsap Conference Center at Bremerton Harborside; or (3) The service of liquor is administered during an event or activity which is: (i) licensed by the City as a special event pursuant to Chapter 5.36 BMC, or (ii) authorized bjthe City Council upon terms and conditions as established by the City Councilptt ^N*�� agfeemefft appfeNed by City Gotta , and (iii) such service and consumption of liquor is limited to beer and wine. (b) Pendergast Regional Park - Indoor Soccer Center. Within the mezzanine food service area of the Olympic Soccer and Sports Center ("Indoor Soccer Center") located within Pendergast Regional Park when: (1) Permitted by the Washington State Liquor Control Board; (2) Such service of liquor is administered by the operator of the Indoor Soccer Center; and (3) Such service and consumption is limited to beer and wine. (c) Eastpark - Bremerton Ice Arena. Within the building of the Bremerton Ice Arena facility ("Ice Arena") located within Eastpark when: (1) Permitted by the Washington State Liquor Control Board; (2) Such service of liquor is administered by the operator of the Ice Arena; (3) Such service and consumption is limited to beer and wine; (4) Such service and consumption, when in the viewing stands area, is limited to private funetionsevents, not public events; however, service and consumption of liquor are prohibited on the field of play; and Otto Jarstad Park - Liquor (5) Required approval has been granted by the National Parks Service, on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to the deed conveying the property to the City. (d) Evergreen Rotary Park. Sampling of beer and wine and sales of beer and wine within the boundaries of a farmer's market licensed or permitted area located within Evergreen Rotary Park when: (1) Permitted by the Washington State Liquor Control Board; (2) Authorized by the City Council upon terms and conditions as established by the City Council; and (3) Such services comply with the requirements of RCW 66.24.170, 66.24.175, 66.24.240, and 66.24.244 and other related statutory or regulatory requirements, as currently enacted or hereinafter amended; and (4) The sampling area is located within a forty-eight (48) inch high barrier or other designated booth or stall, the location and aesthetics of which are subject to approval by the Director of Parks and Recreation. (e) Otto Jarstad Park, which is City utilily property maintained by the Department of Public Works and Utilities. Within the boundaries of Otto Jarstad Park when: (1) Permitted by the Washington State Liquor Control Board, and (2) Such service and consumption of liquor is limited to beer and wine, and (3) Permitted by the City's Director of Public Works and Utilities, or designee as a private, not a public event, subject to terms and conditions as established by the Director, or (4) The service of liquor is administered during an event or activity which is: (i) licensed by the Cit.. a�pecial event pursuant to Chapter 5.36 BMC, or (ii) authorized by the City Council upon terms and conditions as established by the City Council. For purposes of this section, Section 13.04.140, the authorized service and consumption of liquor includes any related sale of liquor. Private event means events, such as weddings and birthday parties, authorized for use of specific space within a park by private groups pursuant to a permit or rental agreement, 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 2 Otto Jarstad Park - Liquor ATTEST: PATTY LENT, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the day of , 2017 EFFECTIVE the day of , 2017 ORDINANCE NO. Otto Jarstad Park - Liquor AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Resolution No. 3292 to amend the Department of Financial Services — Rate Table A relating to Fees for Public Records Study Session Date: COUNCIL MEETING Date: Department: Presenter: Phone: July 12, 2017 July 19, 2017 Financial Services Mike Riley (360) 473-5323 SUMMARY: The State Legislature passed Engrossed House Bill 1595 amending the Public Records Act (RCW 42.56). It requires an agency to establish a statement of costs after notice and a public hearing. Additionally, the bill defines the maximum costs an agency may charge for providing public records. The bill is effective July 23, 2017. To be able to charge the maximum costs after this date, the City Council must hold a public hearing and adopt the new costs. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 3292; with Exhibit A FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None STUDY SESSION AGENDA: x❑ No Presentation ❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ General Business 0 Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 3292 to amend the Department of Financial Services — Rate Table A relating to Fees for Public Records. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action RESOLUTION NO. 3292 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, amending Department of Financial Services — Rate Table A, relating to fees for public records. WHEREAS, the City Council, by this resolution, desires to amend the rates and fees established for Financial Services — Rate Table A in Resolution No. 3280; and WHEREAS, Engrossed House Bill 1595 amends RCW 42.56.070(7) that an agency may establish a statement of costs adopted by an agency only after providing notice and public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City provided notice on July 5, 2017, for a Public Hearing to be held on July 19, 2017; and WHEREAS, Engrossed House Bill 1595 amends RCW 42.56.120(2)(b) providing for an agency need not calculate the actual costs it charges for providing public records if it has rules or regulations declaring the reasons doing so would be unduly burdensome; and WHEREAS, the City is a municipal corporation of the State of Washington which provides general municipal and utility services to its residents and others; and WHEREAS, the magnitude and diversity of the seven (7) City departments with an even greater number of divisions/subdivisions, has resulted in the creation and use of many different computer systems, programs and information retaining systems of which copying, printing or scanning the records is performed by a wide range of employees with a wide range of equipment, including maintenance and supplies, to perform such duties that calculating actual costs for providing such records would be extremely difficult and unduly burdensome; and WHEREAS, the City's operations do not allow for the addition, revision or reassignment of duties of existing personnel so that an actual cost calculation can be formulated; and WHEREAS, the City has a longstanding and recognized policy of charging the maximum allowed under RCW 42.56.120; NOW THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION]. Recitals Incorporated. The recitals set forth above in this resolution are hereby incorporated and adopted herein as if fully set forth herein. 2017 Rates and Fees — Rate Table A Amendment SECTION 2. Rate Table Amended. Rates and fees for services relating to the Department of Financial Services — Rate Table A, as established by Resolution No. 3280, are hereby amended herein by this resolution as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 3. Effective Date of Section 2. The amendments to the Department of Financial Services — Rate Table A as set forth in Section 2 above shall be effective July 23, 2017. SECTION 4. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this Resolution are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Resolution and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force on upon passage. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this day of )2017. ERIC YOUNGER, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk 2 2017 Rates and Fees — Rate Table A Amendment Exhibit A FINANCIAL SERVICES — RATE TABLE A All Rates Listed are "Not To Exceed" Fees A. FINANCIAL SERVICES 1. REGULATORY LICENSE FEES RATE BMC 5.17 Charitable Solicitation Non -Profit $25/60 days Professional Fundraiser $675/60 days BMC 5.22 Dance/Public $265/yr or $70/30 days BMC 5.96 Erotic Dance Studios $700/yr Dancers $100/yr BMC 5.16 Mobile Food Vendor $150/veh/yr BMC 5.16 Peddlers $75/yr or $25/30days BMC 5.36 Special Events $100.00/event BMC 5.08 Street/SidewalkVendors $100/yr Site Relocation $50.00 BMC 5.16 Temporary Merchant $400/30 days 2. BUSINESS LICENSE FEE RATE BMC 5.02 $75/yr 3. PARKING On -Street Locations Not to Exceed $20/3 hrs $30/10 hrs Off -Street Location Not to Exceed $20/3 hrs $30/10 hrs Parking Garage Not to Exceed $200/mo 4. DOCUMENT REPRODUCTION FEES RATE Copy or Print '� 8'/z x 11, 8'/z x 14 and 11 x 17 paper size (No $0.15/pg fee for first 50 pages) Scan — 8% x 11, 8% x 14 and 11 x 17 paper size (No fee for first 50 paszes) $0.10/pa Electronic Files or Attachment uploaded to email, cloud -based data $0.05/4 files storaee service or other means of electronic delivery Resolution No. 3292 Exhibit A FINANCIAL SERVICES — RATE TABLE A All Rates Listed are "Not To Exceed" Fees Transmission of Public Records in an Electronic Format Video Reproduction CD/DVD USB 2 GB Postage or Delivery Charges Certification Oversized Plans, Aerial Photos, Drawings, and Maps (Black and White) Color GIS Plotted Maps $0.10/GB Actual Costs including personnel time $2.00 $5.00 Actual Costs $5.00 $8/pg or Actual Costs when performed by a Vendor $5/sq. ft. In addition to the above fees, each department may establish fees for records that do not fall into one of the above categories. Each department and the City Clerk shall have the department's fee schedule available for inspection uponrequest. 5. CHECK HANDLING FEE $40 6. ANIMAL CONTROL FEES Licenses for Dogs and Cats For Each Cat Spayed or Neutered (Upon Proof of Spaying or Neutering) Annual $7.50 Lifetime $25.00 For Each Dog Spayed or Neutered (Upon Proof of Spaying or Neutering) Annual $12.50 Lifetime $45.00 For Each Cat Not Spayed or Neutered $37.50 For Each Dog Not Spayed or Neutered $37.50 Senior Citizen Permanent Dog/Cat $12.50 Replacement Tag $ 1.00 Additional License Fee (for late renewal) $10.00 License for Chickens For up to five (5) chickens (annually) $12.50 Senior permanent for up to five (5) chickens $12.50 Resolution No. 3292 Exhibit A FINANCIAL SERVICES — RATE TABLE A All Rates Listed are "Not To Exceed" Fees Impound and Redemption Fees - Domestic Animals Impound Vaccination Boarding (per day) Medical care Microchip Impound and Redemption Fees - Livestock Impound Boarding (per day) Medical care Special Transportation fee $45 45 20 Case dependent $30 $60 $40 Case dependent $120 Resolution No. 3292 AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 5330 to amend Section 20.46.010 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) regarding "Accessory Dwelling Units" Study Session Date: July 12, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Julv 19. 2017 Department: Presenter: Phone: DCD Allison Satter (360) 473.5285 SUMMARY: The action before Council is to conduct a Public Hearing and adopt an Ordinance to amend Title 20 of the Bremerton Municipal Code as follows: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Revise the regulations to remove the owner -occupancy requirement, add additional design standards, and revise the allowed unit size. This Zoning Code amendment was publicized for the June 21, 2017 Zoning Code Amendments Public Hearing, however as additional information was requested by City Council, an additional ordinance has been provided for this Public Hearing. No public testimony regarding ADUs was received at the Public Hearing on June 21, 2017. ATTACHMENTS: A. Staff Memo, Follow-up to July 12 Study Session B. Ordinance No. 5330 Exhibit A — Planning Commission Findings and Conclusions C. Staff Memo, including Planning Commission's Minutes for the workshop on April 18, 2017, and Public Hearing on May 16, 2017. FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ❑ No Presentation x❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑ Consent Agenda ❑ General Business 0 Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to pass Ordinance No. 5330 to amend Section 20.46.010 of the Bremerton Municipal Code regarding Accessory Dwelling Units. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action To: City Council's Packet for July 19, 2017 From: Allison Satter, Senior Planner Date: July 13, 2017 Subject: ADU Ordinance Amendments SUMMARY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM After significant debate on the July 12, 2017's City Council Study Session, Council directed Staff to amend the proposed ordinance to require owner -occupancy for 12 -months of the year. The agenda bill and its associated attachments reflected the Planning Commission's recommendation to remove the owner -occupancy requirements and therefore the Staff's Memo contains extended discussions on the owner -occupied requirements and its removal. The proposed ordinance maintains and strengthens the owner -occupied provisions. POTENTIAL MOTION TO AMEND THE ADU ORDINANCE At the Study Session, there were Councilmembers who supported the Planning Commission's recommendation, and therefore the following motion may be offered following the Public Hearing on July 19, 2017. "I move to amend the ordinance to incorporate the Planning Commission's recommendation to remove the owner occupancy requirements for ADUs by removing subsections (k) and (1) of BMC 20.46.010." ORDINANCE NO. 5330 AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, amending the Bremerton Municipal Code Section 20.46.010 titled "Accessory Dwelling Units." WHEREAS, through practical use and application of the Zoning Code the need for modification has been identified; and WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton ("City") has established a procedure for amending the Zoning Code in Title 20.18.020(d) of the Bremerton Municipal Code ("BMC"), which requires amendments to the Zoning Code to be both consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and to be consistent with other applicable rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, these amendments are consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, County Wide Planning Policies, The State Growth Management Act, and other applicable regulations and ordinances; and WHEREAS, on April 18, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted a workshop on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2017, a State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") Determination of Nonsignificance ("DNS") was issued for the proposed action and no appeals were filed; and WHEREAS, on April 20, 2017, the proposed Zoning Code amendments were circulated to the State Agencies for the requisite review and comment period; and WHEREAS, on May 6, 2017, the public was notified by a legal advertisement in the Kitsap Sun of the opportunity to make comment and participate in the public hearing held by the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on May 16, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Zoning Code amendments and formulated a recommendation to forward the amendments for City Council consideration; and WHEREAS, on June 9, 2017, the public was notified by a legal advertisement in the Kitsap Sun of the opportunity to make comment and participate in the public hearing on June 21, 2017 by the City Council; and WHEREAS, on June 17, 2017, City Council removed this specific topic of ADUs from the Zoning Code proposed amendments ordinance to make this topic a separate ordinance and it was made clear at the June 21, 2017 Public Hearing that this item was removed and rescheduled for July 19, 2017, but testimony would be considered if provided. No public testimony was received at the June 21, 2017's Public Hearing regarding ADUs; and Title 20 BMC Updates WHEREAS, on July 8, 2017, the public was notified by a legal advertisement in the Kitsap Sun of the opportunity to make comment and participate in the public hearing by the City Council on July 19, 2017; and WHEREAS, on July 19, 2017, the City Council conducted a public hearing and considered all testimony prior to their decision; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findings and Recitals Incorporated. The findings and recitals set forth above are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. Planning Commission FindiMs. The findings and conclusions adopted by the Planning Commission attached hereto as Exhibit A are adopted and incorporated as if set forth herein in full. SECTION 3. Chapter 20.46 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Special Development Standards" is hereby amended by amending Section 20.46.010 to read as follows: 20.46.010 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) may be italle4-permitted where a new or existing single-family dwelling unit (hereafter, "principal unit") is allowed. Accessory dwelling units are exempt from density requirements and shall be subject to the following spee fie development requirements: (a) An ADU shall comply with the development standards of the underlying zone for the principal unit including setbacks, height, and lot coverage or BMC 20.44.060: Accessory Structures Setbacks for detached ADUs. (b) An ADU may be attached or detached from the principal unit. (c) Only one (1) ADU may be created per lot. The lot shall only contain one (1) single-family dwelling unit and one (1) ADU. (d) Manufactured homes may be allowed as an accessory dwelling unit provided it complies with the design criteria of ADUs and must comply with BMC 20.46.040 Manufactured Home provisions, excluding subsection 20.46.040(a)(2) and (6) regarding size and roof pitch. {e4 An ADU shall be subordinate to the principal unit. The ADU shall be limited to not more than sixty (60) percent of the principal unit's total habitable floor area with the following exception: (1) To encourage the compact infill development and use of existing_sing_le- family homes, if a residence that was constructed or remodeled prior to January 1, 2017 is proposed to be divided into a principal unit and an ADU, the Director may allow equal square footage for the principal unit and the ADU if the ADU is located completely on a single floor of the existing residence. This does not apply to detached ADUs. 2 Title 20 BMC Updates i ) Sixty (6.(ll�vrrt of 4�'r the przia o�3arunit's; tet -Al flevvr cai:oa et inG4+diac (2) One 4i ettsan (1,000) e feet m . loss tha throe t,,,adf:e (300) S"afe feet (f) Any ADU shall be designed so that the appearance of the building remains that of a single-family residence and should architecturally blend into the existing neighborhoods through careful design. Unless the ADU is limited to only interior remodeling of an existing single-family dwelling, a proposed ADU shall meet the following design standards: 44e4tdii4g the standards: fe (1) , Exterior Finish: The exterior of an ADU shall have siding and roofing which in color, material and appearance are comparable to the predominant materials of the primary dwelling unit and/or characteristics of the neighborhood. (i) Roofing: A roof of equal or greater pitch as the principal unit. (ii) Eaves: The minimum projection is twelve (12) inches. (3) Aught ne mere 41,on twenty z5) per -Gent g tVr 41,on 41,A nrin Gipa r..t not to exeeed the height limit of the zone. (2) Detailed design: All ADUs shall provide detailed design using at least four (4) of the following architectural features: (i) Trim to denote all building's roof lines, porches, windows and doors that is at least three (3) inches wide (ii)Dormers(iii) Gables iv)Recessed entries v_)Covered porch entries vi)Offsets in buildinsi face or roof (minimum sixteen (16) inches (vii) Bay windows (viii) Decorative cornices and roof lines (ix) Shutters (x)Brickwork, masonry or stucco (xi)Any alternative feature providing visual relief similar to the options listed above provided it must be approved by the Director (g) The entrance to an attached ADU shall not be on the same facade of the structure as an entrance to the principal unit. Exterior stairway shall not be constructed on the street - frontage side of the principal dwelling unit. (-h} Accessory dwelling units shall provide one (1) off-street parking space in addition to that which is required for the principal unit. When adding an ADU, all driveways and areas used for loading, parking, and maneuvering vehicles on the parcel shall have a paved surface. (}) When development of an ADU is for people with disabilities, the Director may allow reasonable deviation from the stated requirements to install features that facilitate accessibility such as those required by the International Building Code. Fit An ADU shall be reauired to be served by City water and sewer or an abbroved septic system. Title 20 BMC Updates 0) An ADU :h -Ave, -;4 &Vead- FoUrVe-F-d-e-4 0144h the Kitsap GetmtyAuditer-te (k) The property owner, which shall include titleholders and contract purchasers, must occupy either the principal unit or the ADU as their permanent residence for all twelve (12) months of the year. (1) An ADU shall have a deed restriction recorded with the Kitsap County Auditor to indicate the presence of the ADU, the requirement of owner occupancy, and other standards for maintaining the unit as described above. SECTION 4. 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 5. 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: PATTY LENT, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the day of 2017. EFFECTIVE the day of 2017. ORDINANCE NO. .19 Title 20 BMC Updates Exhibit A FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION Summary: The proposed amendments to Bremerton Municipal Code include amending Title 20 Land Use Chapter related to appeals, fences, occupied Recreational Vehicles, Automobile Service and Repair as a permitted use in the General Commercial zone and as a Conditional Use in the Neighborhood Business zone, the definition of Automobile Service and Repair, and regulations for Accessory Dwelling Units. I. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Project Description: The proposed amendment package includes revisions to Title 20 as follows: • A clarification to the Appeals code section, regarding who has standing to appeal; • A minor revision to fence regulations; • Revisions to the regulations regarding occupied Recreational Vehicles (RVs) on private property; • Allowing automobile service and repair as an outright permitted use in the General Commercial zone; • Permitting automobile service and repair as a conditional use in the Neighborhood Business zone, where existing buildings are suitable for the use and where additional criteria are met. • Revising the definition of Automobile Service and Repair, to include repair of any vehicles not registered to the resident, in a residential area. • Revise the Accessory Dwelling Unit criteria for approval, including removing owner - occupied requirement, adding design standards, and revising the size limitations. 2. Procedural History: 2.1 Planning Commission Workshop: April 18, 2017 2.2 SEPA Threshold Determination DNS: April 24, 2017 2.3 Washington State Department of Commerce Notice: April 20, 2017 2.4 Notice of Public Hearing: May 6, 2017 2.5 Planning Commission Public Hearing: May 16, 2017 3. Public and Agency Comment: 3.1 April 18, 2017 Workshop Comment: Mike Coslett, owner of Cars Automotive business. Wants to locate at 3740 Wheaton Way 3.2 April 18, 2017 Workshop Comment: Byung Yu Ben, property owner at 3740 Wheaton Way. Would like an auto related business to be able to operate there. 4. SEPA Determination: A Determination of Non -Significance was issued on April 24, 2017, to date no comments or appeals have been filed. 5. Consistency: Text amendments to Title 20 shall meet the decision criteria outlined in BMC 20.18.020(d). The Planning Commission may recommend, and the City Council may adopt or adopt with modifications, an amendment to Title 20 if the criteria outlined below are met. Exhibit A (1) It is consistent with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan; Analysis: The proposed amendments continue to uphold the objectives and goals of the Comprehensive Plan, and implement the following policies: LU2(A): In order to combat chronic vacancy experienced in select areas, the City should consider zoning regulations that promote occupancy for buildings that are experiencing prolonged vacancy. LU2(C): Support adaptive reuse of existing buildings with uses that are compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. H1(F): Promote a robust code enforcement program to protect the safety and aesthetic quality of existing neighborhoods. H3(A): Provide opportunities for the production of new housing for all incomes, ages, and family types through infill by stimulating growth of non-traditional housing types such as townhomes, carriage units, accessory dwelling units, and duplexes in locations where they will seamlessly infill into the fabric of the existing neighborhoods. H4(D): Encourage efficient permit review by eliminating unnecessary regulatory impediments, improving certainty in development regulations, and provide an expedited permit process. (2) It does not conflict with other City, state and federal codes, regulations and ordinances. Analysis: The proposed amendments do not conflict with any other regulations. II. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Based on the findings above, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposed amendments to the Bremerton Municipal Code Title 20 Land Use Chapter, meets the requirements in BMC 20.18.020(d) text amendments, and therefore recommends to the City Council, the adoption of amendments to Title 20. submitted by: Secretary ck Wo ff , Pla ng Commission Chair dG FJ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM To: City Council From: Allison Satter, Senior Planner Date: June 30, 2017 Subject: Amendments to the Zoning Code regarding Accessory Dwelling Units SUMMARY City Council is requested to provide a decision for the proposed Ordinance that amends the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU). The revisions to the ADU provisions include removing the owner -occupancy requirement, add additional design standards, and revisions to the allowed unit size. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Recommendation: Planning Commission unanimously recommended the ADU amendments following a Public Hearing held on May 16, 2017. Minutes from this meeting as well as the workshop held on April 18, 2017 are attached to this report. Minority Report: Though Planning Commission unanimously recommended the Zoning Code Amendments, in regards to the Accessory Dwelling Unit proposed amendments, the Chair was concerned for removal of the requirement that the owner needs to occupy one of the units on- site (discussed in more detail later in this memo). A motion was proposed by the Chair for consideration during the meeting to maintain the owner -occupancy requirements of the code, however the motion was not accepted by members of the Commission. Director Spencer assured the Commission that this minority report would be delivered to the Council. CITY COUNCIL'S OPTIONS: • Approved amendments as proposed by Planning Commission; or • Modify the proposed amendments; or • Reject the proposed amendments. ATTACHMENTS: • Attachment A: Current ADU provisions • Attachment B: Proposed Amendments to ADU provisions (duplicate of ordinance language without legislative markup) • Attachment C: Planning Commission Minutes from April 2017: Workshop and May 2017: Public Hearing SUMMARY OF ACCESORY DWELLING UNITS (ADUs) Accessory Dwelling Units in Washington State Many Washington cities and counties are required by the 1993 Washington Housing Policy Act to adopt ordinances encouraging the development of accessory apartments or accessory dwelling units in single-family zones. Specifically, this legislation applies to: • Cities with populations of over 20,000, • Counties with populations of over 125,000, and • Counties/cities that plan under the Growth Management Act (GMA). Local codes must incorporate the model ordinance recommendations prepared by the Department of Commerce (RCW 43.63A.215 and RCW 36.70A.400). State law allows local communities some flexibility to adapt these recommendations to local needs and preferences. ADU ordinances have been widely adopted in Washington, since the 1993 Act. In part, this is because ADUs have helped local jurisdictions meet GMA goals to encourage affordable housing and provide a variety of housing densities and types, while preserving the character of single- family neighborhoods. History of ADUs Bremerton has had ADU provisions in zoning code since the 1988 Zoning Code. In general, development of accessory dwelling units can be traced back to the early twentieth century, when they were a common feature in single-family housing. After World War II, an increased demand for housing led to a booming suburban population. This development can be characterized as large lots and an emphasis on the nuclear family, suburban development conformed to Euclidean -type zoning codes, a system of land -use regulations that segregate districts according to use. Suburbs continued to be a prevalent form of housing development throughout the 1950s and 1960s. The rapid growth of suburbs reinforced the high demand for lower -density development, and ultimately led most local jurisdictions to prohibit ADU construction. In spite of zoning restrictions, illegal construction of ADUs continued in communities where the existing housing stock was not meeting demand; San Francisco was one such community. During World War II, the Bay Area experienced a defense boom that created a high demand for workforce housing, resulting in a large number of illegally constructed second units. By 1960, San Francisco housed between 20,000 to 30,000 secondary units, 90 percent of which were built illegally. Today, City of San Francisco assumes 20% of their marketed rental properties are illegal. In response to suburban sprawl, increased traffic congestion, restrictive zoning, and the affordable housing shortage, community leaders began advocating a change from the sprawling development pattern of suburban design to a more traditional style of planning. Urban design movements, such as Smart Growth and New Urbanism, emerged in the 1990s to limit automobile dependency and improve the quality of life by creating inclusive communities that provide a wide range of housing choices (the Washington State Growth Management Act is another prime example). Both design theories focus on reforming planning practices to create housing development that is high density, transit -oriented, mixed-use, and mixed -income 0 Page 2 through redevelopment and infill efforts. In the late 1970s to the 1990s, some municipalities adopted ADU programs to permit the use and construction of accessory units. Many of these programs were not very successful, as they lacked flexibility and scope. Although a number of communities still restrict development of accessory dwelling units, there is a growing awareness and acceptance of ADUs as an inexpensive way to increase the affordable housing supply and address illegal units already in existence. Source. U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research. Accessory Dwelling Units. Case Study: https://www.HUDuser.gov/portal/publications/ADU.pdf Why is Bremerton discussing ADU revisions? As highlighted in a recent My Turn article in the Kitsap Sun (dated June 26, 2017), "Local supply of rental housing is down, demand is up, and those with the lowest financial resources are being squeezed to the point of homelessness. Wages remain stagnant and newly -built market -rate rental and owner -occupied housing in Kitsap County remains out of reach for many." (http://www. kitsapsun.com/story/opinion/2017/06/26/my-turn-kitsap-county-should-consider- housing-Ievy/430537001/). Though the article is primarily about a promoting a housing levy, it does capture the housing predicament that many citizens of the City of Bremerton are currently facing. Community Development staff and Planning Commission saw this as an opportunity to look at our current codes to see how we can try to address this housing issue in some way. This current proposal is relaxes some aspects of the ADU provisions so that the City can promote more ADUs as another form of housing. How many ADUs has the City permitted? Accessory Dwelling Units are currently not widely used in the City. Since 2007, the City of Bremerton has approved and completed final inspections for 15 ADUs within 11 years: Year No. of ADUs Produced 2007 3 2008 2 2009 1 2010 2 2011 0 2012 0 Year No. of ADUs Produced 2013 2 2014 0 2015 2 2016 3 2017 (Jan -June) None Pending The trend of permitting very few ADUs is common in most cities within the State. Many cities have been exploring policy changes that would increase the production of ADUs. City of Seattle has studied many options to revision their ADU provisions to address their need for more housing. A recent revision that Seattle adopted was to relax their ADU provisions to allow Detached ADUs ("backyard cottages"), prior to this ADUs had to be attached or within the principal unit, and since 2010 fewer than 200 detached ADUs have been constructed ("less than one quarter of 1 % of the single-family lots in Seattle" (source: "Removing Barriers to Backyard Cottages" Seattle DPD Report & Analysis. October 2015: www.seattle.gov/dpd/cs/groups/pan/@pan/documents/web informational/s010013.pdf)). Seattle is continuing to explore other options to promote ADUs including removing the off-street parking requirements for new ADUs (similar to Portland standards). 0 Page 3 What is proposed for Bremerton's ADU regulations? Planning Commission sees the potential benefits of ADUs and recommends reducing the regulations to make ADUs a more viable option in Bremerton. The increasingly tight housing market means fewer affordable housing units available citywide; ADUs are one way to provide infill housing without significant investments in new infrastructure to support housing growth. In addition, the amendment to the current regulations will allow many unpermitted, illegal existing units to be legitimized through current permitting. The proposed amendments to the ADU code include: Removal of the Owner -Occupancy Requirement — The existing regulations require homeowners with an accessory dwelling unit to reside in either the principal or the accessory unit for at least six months of the year. This requirement originally arose due to concerns that allowing ADUs without it would effectively allow duplexes citywide. Under the current code, a property owner cannot rent both the principal unit and an accessory unit. Furthermore, a property owner that currently rents their residence cannot construct an ADU for rental without terminating the rental agreement for the house and moving into either the principal unit or the accessory unit. Striking the owner -occupied requirement will allow both the principal and accessory unit to be rented. This would provide property owners greater flexibility to decide how and whether to rent their units, will remove a potential barrier to ADU construction, and potentially increase the number of quality housing units available. Concerns have been expressed that removing this requirement would essentially allow duplexes, it is true that this requirement would allow two -rentable units on a property, however the additional design standards have been proposed that require the ADU maintains the appearance of as a single family home and the ADU be subordinate. Duplex Example -Equal in size -Entrance can be on same side -Usually "mirrored" floor plans -These features are not allowed by the ADU code 0 Page 4 Accessory Dwelling Unit & Principal Unit Example -One unit is subordinate -Entrances to both units cannot be on the same fapade or street frontage -ADUs should appear similar to principal unit 2. Revising the Maximum and Minimum Size Requirements — The current code has minimum and maximum size requirements of 300 to 1,000 square feet respectively. The Code also requires that the ADU not exceed 60 percent of the principal unit square footage. The amended code maintains the 60 percent provision but eliminates the minimum and maximum square footage requirements. This amendment still assures that the unit remains subordinate in size from the principal unit, or will appear as part of the single-family home. The proposed amendments contain provisions that allow some existing residences (constructed prior to 2017) with nonconforming or unrecognized upstairs/downstairs flats to create ADUs. This provision has been proposed to address many illegal units in the City that have been developed as two apartments (upstairs is mirrored to the downstairs). This will allow these units to obtain a permit and gain building and fire safety compliance and ensure Bremerton has more quality housing units. 3. Including Design Criteria —The proposed code requires that a proposed ADU include at least four (4) of twelve (12) listed potential design elements, in addition to the current regulations of height, roof pitch and exterior materials. The additional design criteria was added to ensure ADUs appear like a small, single-family home. 4. Clarification of the Parking Requirement — The code has been proposed to be amended to emphasize the requirement that parking spaces be paved. This requirement exists in current code, but can be overlooked since parking requirements are in a separate chapter of the zoning code. This amendment will help property owners better assess the feasibility of an ADU. The current code regarding how much off-street parking is required is not proposed to be changed. The current and proposed regulations require three paved off-street parking spaces (two for the residence and one for the ADU). If they cannot locate parking onsite, then the ADU would not be allowed. 5. Clarification of Required Setbacks — The proposed code would permit ADUs to meet the same setbacks as accessory structures. This will allow ADUs to be located on the top of a detached garage. As Staff understands the importance of trying to promote more quality, affordable housing units into the City, we also understand that the amendments are more progressive than the regulations many of our local jurisdictions have currently adopted (below is a summary of other jurisdictions and how they regulate ADUs). Staff has committed to monitoring ADU permitting and provide the findings to Planning Commission regarding how the new regulations are working. The anticipated timeframe would be to provide the first report in 18 months (end of 2018). If additional amendments are needed at that time, Planning Commission has committed to re-evaluating this section. However, Planning Commission and Staff agree that these amendments are something Bremerton needs to obtain more affordable, quality housing into the City. 0 Page 5 Bainbridge Island Port Orchard Yes — year round 50% of the principal unit Poulsbo Yes — 6 months 800 square feet maximum, Conditional Use Permit for larger building Kitsap County Yes — 6 months 50% of the principal unit not to exceed 900 square feet Tacoma Yes — year round 40% of the principal unit not to exceed 1,000 square feet Everett Yes — year round 75% of the principal unit not to exceed 800 square feet Shoreline Yes — year round 50% of the principal unit Gig Harbor Yes Maximum 600 square feet Portland, Oregon No 75% of the principal unit not to exceed 800 square feet Bremerton (current) Yes — 6 months 60% of the principal unit not to exceed 1,000 square feet Bremerton (proposed) No 60% of the principal unit Is this consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan? The proposed zoning code amendments to the ADU provisions are consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: • Housing Element Vision: to encourage the growth of Bremerton by strategically locating a wide variety of housing types throughout the City. • Housing Goal 2. Encourage the development of a variety of new housing options and densities to meet the changing needs of Bremerton's residents. • Housing Goal 3. Support access to quality and affordable housing for all Bremerton residents. • Policy H2(C). Supporting infill development and increased densities • Policy H3(A). Provide opportunities for the production of new housing for all incomes, ages, and family types through infill by stimulating growth of non-traditional housing types such as townhomes, carriage units, accessory dwelling units, and duplexes in locations where they will seamlessly infill into the fabric of the existing neighborhoods. • Policy H3(C). Support increased densities and infill projects in order to capitalize on the cost efficiency of utilization of existing utility services. • Policy H2(E). Respond to the special needs of the elderly population within the City. Encourage programs which allow elderly to remain in their homes as long as possible. • Policy H3(E). Eliminate unnecessary regulatory impediments to the development of affordable housing. 0 Page 6 • Land Use Element Vision. Bremerton is a metropolitan city that provides for economic vitality and diverse lifestyles through a broad variety of jobs, housing, and strategically located commercial and recreational opportunities. • Policy LU3(D). Adopt site and building standards that contribute to reduced greenhouse gas emissions and result in more sustainable development. • Policy LU3(1). Promote infill and concurrent infrastructure improvements in areas that are already developed in order to preserve rural areas, open spaces, and ecological functioning lands within the City. • Policy LU1-LDR(C). Allow accessory units associated with, and subordinate to, existing or new single family dwellings when appropriate. How does this impact the Landlord License Requirement? During the Study Session on June 14, City Council brought up the concern regarding how would removing the owner -occupied requirement for ADUs impacts the Landlord License pursuant to BMC 5.02 and 5.06. Currently the code exempts the property owner from getting a landlord license if a property owner lives on site and is renting out one unit on premise (this can include an ADU or renting out one room within your house would be exempt from getting a landlord license). This only applies if the property owner rents one unit, if there is more than one unit rented, a landlord license is required. Therefore, if the owner -occupied requirement for ADU was removed and a property owner wanted to rent out the primary structure and the ADU, a landlord license will be required. Does Bremerton have too much rental units? The City of Bremerton has 42.7% owner -occupied housing units pursuant to the 2010 Census records. That would equate to 57.3% of the housing units being renter -occupied (the City has about 15,000 units, so about 8,600 units are rental). The national trend for home ownerships has been a 60%/40% split: 60% owner -occupied, and 40% rental units. Bremerton does not fall into the national average and it has been a goal to develop policies to affect our trend. Through substantial research, Staff has identified a few key considerations for Council regarding the City having more rentals then the national average: • Navy Influence. Being located adjacent to the Naval Base Kitsap (NBK)-Bremerton, the City of Bremerton serves a transient population. At any time, the NBK-Bremerton is port to one to three naval vessels, with each vessel hosting approximately 3,000 sailors, officers and supporting Navy staff to this area. There are some onsite accommodations on base, but many of Navy employees seek housing (and the housing -stipend) off the base and into our community. Due to our location, many Navy personnel will seek renting versus home ownership as their time here in Bremerton is typically limited to a few months to a few years (and subject to change depending on their orders). Bremerton, as most military towns, have additional rentals due to this very important transient population. An example of a few communities that are adjacent to a military installation are comparable to the City's trend (based off the 2010 Census data): ➢ Lakewood/Joint Base Lewis-McChord: 46.2% homeownership 0 Page 7 ➢ Everett/Naval Station Everett: 43.9% homeownership ➢ San Diego/Naval Base San Diego: 46.9% homeownership ➢ Groton, CT/Navy Submarine Base New London: 41.5% homeownership ➢ New London, CT/Navy Submarine Base New London: 35.2% homeownership ➢ Junction City Kansas/Fort Riley Army: 46.1 % homeownership ➢ Columbia, South Carolina/Fort Jackson Army: 47.4% homeownership ➢ Watertown, New York/Fort Drum Army: 41.4% homeownership ➢ Havelock, North Carolina/Cherry Point Marine Corps: 42.9% homeownership Staff has heard from Navy personnel that if the owner -occupied requirement for ADUs was removed, this would encourage some to buy instead of rent. This is because if an Officer buys a house, builds an ADU and then gets stationed across the country or sent across seas on a mission, how the current code is written, the Officer would have to remove the tenant of the ADU and would only be able to rent out the primary unit (if the Officer did not live at their home for more than 6 -months of the year). This greatly impacts the property owner, and the ADU tenant, and thus is not widely used by the military population. In addition, the ADU's tenant could be a great resource for the Officer's property as this is additional income and when they are serving their orders, the tenant could be maintaining their property in their absence. National Home Ownership Trends. The second consideration for Council is that the national trend of owner-occupied/rental units appears to be changing. On March 23, 2017, Bloomberg release an article entitled Renters Now Rule Half of U.S. Cities: The American Dream increasingly involves a lease, not a mortgage (httr)s://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-23/renters-now-rule-half-of-u-s-cities), which identifies that the national trend of 60%/40% is getting closer to a 50/50% spilt of owner - occupied to rental units. The article identifies that 52 of the 100 largest U.S. cities were majority -renter in 2015; 21 of those cities have shifted to renter -domination since 2009 and these include such "hot housing markets" as Denver and San Diego (which San Diego is also a town adjacent to a military installation). This trend of more renters is anticipated to grow throughout 2030 due to the demographic trend that includes aging baby boomers who downsize into rentals. What does this mean for people who already have ADUs? If an ADU was permitted prior to this code adoption, the code provisions at the time of application is what the property vest to. The property owner is allowed to maintain the ADU for the life of the structure. If they wanted to remove the owner -occupied requirement, a separate permit would be required to remove the current notice to title that is on their property deed. Contact Information I am happy to answer questions that the City Council or public has regarding the Planning Commission's recommendations to amend the ADU provisions. Please call or email me, Allison Satter at (360) 473-5845 or Allison.Satter(aD-ci.bremerton.wa.us 0 Page 8 Attachment A Existing ADU Code 20.46.010 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) may be installed where a new or existing single-family dwelling unit (hereafter, "principal unit") is allowed. Accessory dwelling units are exempt from density requirements and shall be subject to the following specific development, design and owner occupancy standards: (a) An ADU shall comply with the development standards of the underlying zone for the principal unit including setbacks, height, and lot coverage. (b) An ADU may be attached or detached from the principal unit. (c) Only one (1) ADU may be created per lot. (d) The property owner, which shall include titleholders and contract purchasers, must occupy either the principal unit or the ADU as their permanent residence for at least six (6) months out of the year. (e) An ADU shall be limited to not more than: (1) Sixty (60) percent of the principal unit's total floor area (not including basement); and (2) One thousand (1,000) square feet maximum, nor less than three hundred (300) square feet. (f) Any ADU shall be designed so that the appearance of the building remains that of a single-family residence including the following: (1) Constructed of similar materials and siding as the principal unit; (2) A roof of equal or greater pitch as the principal unit; (3) A height no more than twenty-five (25) percent greater than the principal unit not to exceed the height limit of the zone. (g) The entrance to an attached ADU shall not be on the same facade of the structure as an entrance to the principal unit. (h) Accessory dwelling units shall provide one (1) off-street parking space in addition to that which is required for the principal unit. (i) When development of an ADU is for people with disabilities, the Director may allow reasonable deviation from the stated requirements to install features that facilitate accessibility such as those required by the International Building Code. (j) An ADU shall have a deed restriction recorded with the Kitsap County Auditor to indicate the presence of the ADU, the requirement of owner occupancy, and other standards for maintaining the unit as described above. (Ord. 5301 §3 (Exh. B) (part), 2016: Ord. 5008 §4, 2007: Ord. 4950 §8 (Exh. A) (part), 2005) Attachment B Proposed ADU Code without legislative markup This attachment shows the ADU revisions proposed in Section 3 of the Ordinance without the strike -through and underline indicators. 20.46.010 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) may be permitted where a new or existing single- family dwelling unit (hereafter, "principal unit") is allowed. Accessory dwelling units are exempt from density requirements and shall be subject to the following specific development, and design standards: (a) An ADU shall comply with the development standards of the underlying zone for the principal unit including setbacks, height, and lot coverage or BMC 20.44.060: Accessory Structures Setbacks for detached ADUs. (b) An ADU may be attached or detached from the principal unit. (c) Only one (1) ADU may be created per lot. The lot shall only contain one (1) single-family dwelling unit and one (1) ADU. (d) Manufactured homes may be allowed as an accessory dwelling unit provided it complies with the design criteria of ADUs and must comply with BMC 20.46.040 Manufactured Home provisions, excluding subsection 20.46.040(a)(2) and (6) regarding size and roof pitch. (e) An ADU shall be subordinate to the principal unit. The ADU shall be limited to not more than sixty (60) percent of the principal unit's total habitable floor area with the following exception: (1) To encourage the compact infill development and use of existing single- family homes, if a residence that was constructed or remodeled prior to January 1, 2017 is proposed to be divided into a principal unit and an ADU, the Director may allow equal square footage for the principal unit and the ADU if the ADU is located completely on a single floor of the existing residence. This does not apply to detached ADUs. (f) Any ADU shall be designed so that the appearance of the building remains that of a single-family residence and should architecturally blend into the existing neighborhoods through careful design. Unless the ADU is limited to only interior remodeling of an existing single-family dwelling, a proposed ADU shall meet the following design standards: (1) Exterior Finish: The exterior of an ADU shall have siding and roofing which in color, material and appearance which is comparable to the predominant materials of the primary dwelling unit and/or characteristics of the neighborhood. (i) Roofing: A roof of equal or greater pitch as the principal unit; (ii) Eaves: The minimum projection is 12 inches. (2) Detailed design: All ADU's shall provide detailed design using at least four (4) of the following architectural features: (i) Trim to denote all building's roof lines, porches, windows and doors that is at least three (3) inches wide. (ii) Dormers (iii) Gables (iv) Recessed entries (v) Covered porch entries (vi) Offsets in building face or roof (minimum 16 inches) (vii) Bay windows (viii) Decorative cornices and roof lines (ix) Shutters Attachment B Proposed ADU Code without legislative markup (x) Brickwork, masonry or stucco (xi) Any alternative feature providing visual relief similar to the options listed above (must be approved by the Director). (g) The entrance to an attached ADU shall not be on the same facade of the structure as an entrance to the principal unit. Exterior stairway shall not be constructed on the street - frontage side of the principal dwelling unit. (h) Accessory dwelling units shall provide one (1) off-street parking space in addition to that which is required for the principal unit. When adding an ADU, all driveways and areas used for loading, parking, and maneuvering vehicles on the parcel shall have a paved surface. (i) When development of an ADU is for people with disabilities, the Director may allow reasonable deviation from the stated requirements to install features that facilitate accessibility such as those required by the International Building Code. 0) An ADU shall be required to be served by City water and sewer or an approved septic system. Attachment C CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING April 18, 2017 CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chair Tift called the regular meeting of the Bremerton Planning Commission to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present Vice Chair Tift Commissioner Conley (arrived at 5:47 p.m.) Commissioner Jones Commissioner Goodnow Commissioner Nerf Commissioner Strube (arrived at 5:31 p.m.) Commissioners Absent Chair Wofford (excused) Quorum Certified APPROVAL OF AGENDA Staff Present Andrea Spencer, Director, Department of Community Development Allison Satter, Senior Planner, Department of Community Development Kelli Lambert, Planner, Department of Community Development COMMISSIONER NERF MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER GOODNOW SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Note: Commissioner Conley was not present for this vote.) APPROVAL OF MINUTES COMMISSIONER GOODNOW MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 21, 2017 AS AMENDED. COMMISSIONER NERF SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Note: Commissioner Conley was not present for this vote.) PUBLIC MEETING Call to the Public (public comments on any item not on the agenda) Vice Chair Tift asked if there were any comments from citizens. Seeing none, he closed the public portion of the meeting. Attachment C Public Workshop: Amendments to Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) Title 20 (Zoning Code) Staff presented the following amendments: • Appeals (BMC 20.02.140). Ms. Lambert advised that the current code omits the property owner as a person who has standing to appeal a staff decision. The proposed amendment would correct this omission and be consistent with both State Law and the Building Code. The problem came to staff's attention when a property owner had to file two separate appeals because of the omission. Fences (BMC 20.46.020.g). Ms. Lambert reviewed that the current code states that fences must present a "finished appearance" on their outside face, but there is no definition for the term "finished." This problem came to staff's attention during code enforcement, and the Hearing Examiner found for the homeowner because the term is not defined. The term is very difficult to define, and staff's research of other municipalities found that most are silent on the matter. The intent of the provision is to avoid unsafe or unattractive fences, and staff found that the code already has language to address these concerns. SMC 6.02 (Public Nuisances) prohibits "the existence of arty fence or other structure on private property, which is in a sagging, leaning, fallen, decayed or other unsafe condition. " The proposed amendment would remove the provision related to "finished appearance" from SMC 20.46.020(g). Occupied Recreational Vehicles (RVs) (BMC 20.46.050). Ms. Lambert reviewed that the current zoning code allows for an owner to occupy an RV for up to one year on a property when they are building a new home. It also permits an RV on a residential property to be occupied for a cumulative period not to exceed 30 days during any 12 -month period. Enforcement of this provision is a community concern and the City Council agreed it is a priority to make amendments to make it enforceable. As currently worded, it is difficult to enforce the 30 -day provision when the Code Enforcement Officer only works on weekdays. The proposed amendment would establish a new RV Permit for tracking RVs on residential properties. The permit would allow the City to better track dates of occupancy, and there would be no fee. When a property owner applies for a permit, he/she would be required to identify the dates the RV would be occupied and acknowledge the City's regulations. Automobile Service and Repair (BMC 20.42 Definitions). Ms. Lambert advised that the Code Enforcement Officer receives complaints from time to time about auto repair being done on residential properties. Often there are multiple vehicles on site, and they are blocking access on the street or sidewalk. She reminded the Commission that auto repair is not permitted as a licensed home-based business, but property owners often claim the work is being done for family members or friends, not as a business. Repairing a resident's own personal vehicle might be considered reasonable, as long as other properties are not impacted. However, repairing vehicles that are not registered to the owner or tenant is unacceptable. The proposed amendment would alter the definition of "Automobile Service and Repair" by adding an additional sentence that reads, "Servicing and repairing of automobiles on a residential lot for automobiles that are not registered to the property owners or tenants on the site shall be considered automobile service and repair. " Automobile Service and Repair (BMC 20.62 General Commercial). Ms. Satter reminded the Commissioners that part of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update involved streamlining the zoning code by consolidating 12 commercial zones into 5. The change allowed automobile sales in the Freeway Corridor and Industrial zones only. However, an unintended consequence of the change was that it also limited automobile service and repair uses to the Freeway Corridor and Industrial zones to compliment the areas that allowed automobile sales, and the use was eliminated from two zones (Commercial Corridor and Wheaton Way Redevelopment Corridor) that previously permitted auto service and repair. She explained that it was not staff's intent to limit automobile service and repair along the commercial corridors, as there are numerous existing businesses that became nonconforming with this use elimination. Ms. Satter advised that the proposed amendment would allow automobile repair and auto -related businesses outright in the commercial zones, which are intended for urban, high-intensity commercial activities. • Automobile Service and Repair (BMC 20.82 Neighborhood Business). Ms. Lambert explained that the Neighborhood Business (NB) zones are commercial zones, but they are intended to be small-scale business districts that reflect the scale and character of surrounding neighborhoods. She identified the Neighborhood Business areas as: Naval Avenue from 5t' to Burwell (near the entrance to the shipyard), 6`s Street from High Avenue to Veneta, Callow/Wycoff (Hi Lo's, Hales' Ales vicinity), Marine Drive/Dora Avenue, Arsenal Way near Marion Avenue, Sheridan Road near Pine Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes April 18, 2017 — Page 2 of 7 Attachment C Road, and Manette. Although staff is not recommending that auto -related uses be permitted in Manette, which is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as a City Center, there are other areas of NB zoning that may accommodate this type of business due to existing structures and land uses. Staff is seeking feedback from the Commission about the option of allowing automobile service and repair as a Conditional Use within the NB zones. She further explained that, if a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required to establish an automobile service and repair business, staff would propose conditions that a proposed business within this zone would need to comply with. These conditions would likely include the following: o The Manette NB zone is excluded from permitting auto -related business as it is a designated Center per the Comprehensive Plan. o The automobile service and repair business must locate within an existing building that was originally built to accommodate this type of use rather than constructing a new building. o All parking and outdoor storage areas, if permitted, must have visual screening. o Applicants must demonstrate compliance with noise, odors and light/glare regulations. Accessory Dwelling Units. Ms. Satter noted that this item was not included in the Staff Report. She explained that Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) are basically smaller homes that are subordinate to larger homes on single-family lots. ADUs are located throughout the City and offer a less costly option for housing. The City allows ADUs as a way to address the Growth Management Act (GMA) requirement that the City meet the housing needs for all economic segments of the community. In addition, the Washington Housing Policy Act, which was passed by the Legislature in 1993, established the goals of reducing housing costs and improving housing quality for people of all income groups. The City's code also calls for infill design and higher densities, as well as quality housing. She referred to December 2016 article in THE KITSAP SUN, which identified the City of Bremerton and the Silverdale Metro area as having a healthy housing market. However, that will not necessarily be the case in the future. It is important to have housing units that are both quality and affordable. The City must work to provide a range of housing options, and ADUs are one of the opportunities we should provide. Ms. Satter reviewed that the first ADU provisions were adopted into the City's zoning code in 1988, the code was further amended in 2005. However, the provisions have not been reviewed since that time. This is an opportunity for the Commission to provide preliminary direction and comments about on how well the ADU provisions are working to encourage more quality houses. She noted that many people have created illegal ADUs in the City, and perhaps changes could result in more quality units and fewer illegal units. Staff will present proposed changes at the next Commission meeting. Vice Chair Tift asked for public comments on the proposed zoning code amendments Mike Coslett, Bremerton, said his comments were related to property at 3740 Wheaton Way, where the existing Cars Automotive business is located. He specifically referred to the vacant building that is adjacent to Cars Automotive, which was previously utilized for auto -related activities. He explained that the use is no longer allowed based on the recent zoning limitations that were put in place. He said he currently operates a mobile auto -detailing business, which has grown substantially, he is looking for a home base for his business, and the property at 3740 Wheaton Way would be an excellent location. Bien Yu, Bremerton, said he owns the property at 3740 Wheaton Way and noted that one of the four units has been vacant for about 3 years. It was previously occupied by an auto glass business. He expressed his belief that this is a great location for auto -oriented businesses to serve the community. He noted that there are a number of vacant buildings on Wheaton Way. The Commission discussed each of the proposed amendments as follows: • Appeals (BMC 20.02.140). Commissioner Strube commented that the proposed amendment sounds reasonable, and the remainder of the Commissioners concurred. • Fences (BMC 20.46.020.g). Commissioner Jones asked if the provision refers only to fences facing the street or all fences. Ms. Lambert said the fence code is primarily used for private properties and applies to all fences. Director Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes April 18, 2017 — Page 3 of 7 Attachment C Spencer said staff has done significant research and found that no other city in the state has defined the term "finished." The term is based on the observation of the user and is difficult to define. Vice Chair Tift agreed that it is difficult to define what constitutes "finished. To him, "finished" means complete. He asked how the code would address a situation where a fence is started but never finished. Ms. Lambert answered that this issue could be addressed by the provisions in SMC 6.02 (Public Nuisances). Commissioner Conley asked if the proposed amendment allows room to address the material and design of a fence. Ms. Lambert answered that the current code does not specify materials because there are a variety of nice fences made from different materials. The City's intent is to be more inclusive. However, the code does prohibit fences that are in bad repair. Commissioner Conley said he would be inclined to allow property owners to have any type of fence they want, but he suggested that chain-link fences should be discouraged through incentives. Vice Chair Tift cautioned against opening up this discussion, which would further limit property rights. He reminded them that many neighborhoods have covenants, conditions and restrictions (CCRs) that govern fencing materials and design. Commissioner Conley agreed that it would not be appropriate for the City to prohibit chain-link fences. However, he would be in favor of opportunities to incentivize other options. The Commissioners offered general support for the proposed amendment. • Occupied Recreational Vehicles (RVs) (BMC 20.46.050). Commissioner Strube asked if the City receives a significant number of complaints relative to people living in RVs. Director Spencer said they receive complaints about the most egregious situations. Staffs thought was that a no -fee permit that was easy to obtain would help the Code Enforcement Officer address problems. Commissioner Jones asked if the City would fine property owners who violate the provision by not obtaining a permit. Director Spencer reviewed the multi -step code enforcement process, which starts with notification of the violation. If not addressed appropriately, the issue could eventually go before the Hearing Examiner, who could impose a fine or penalty. Commissioner Jones asked if staff has considered charging a nominal fee for the permit. Director Spencer said the permit is intended to allow the City to track the impacts without creating a real impediment or burden. Commissioner Goodnow asked if the permit would be displayed in the window of the RV, and Director Spencer answered affirmatively. Commissioner Goodnow said he can think of several situations where occupied RV's are a problem. Vice Chair Tift emphasized that the provision would apply to occupied RV's and not stored RV's. The Commissioners offered support for the proposed amendment. Automobile Service and Repair (BMC 20.42 Definitions). Commissioner Nerf recalled that when he was young and financially challenged, he regularly associated with vehicles that were mechanically challenged. In at least a half dozen instances, he was part of some fairly major repairs in driveways that would be in violation of the proposed amendment. All of the problems were resolved in a day or two and would not likely have drawn the attention of code enforcement. He suggested that perhaps a permit approach similar to that proposed for RV's would be appropriate. Director Spencer said the amendment is not necessarily intended to preclude situations that take place over a day or two. The problems the City hears about are people who do car repair as a business, but claim they are simply doing repairs for friends. Commissioner Strube agreed with Commissioner Nerf s concerns. He has a friend who supplements his income by repairing cars in his garage on the weekends. He can understand concerns about nuisance and noise, but he is opposed to placing limits on a person's ability to repair a car in his/her driveway. On the other hand, he recognizes that the amendment is intended to deal with more significant concerns. He said his dad was a mechanic, and he grew up working on cars in his yard. He would hate the City to prohibit property owners from being able to do minor repairs for friends. Director Spencer said the City has received complaints from property owners, particularly where the lots are very small, and the Code Enforcement Officer is unable to address the problem because it is difficult to prove that he/she is actually operating a business. Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes April 18, 2017 — Page 4 of 7 Attachment C Commissioner Goodnow commented that the intent of the proposed amendment is to give the Code Enforcement Officer some teeth to address problem situations. The issue is really about people not being good neighbors. The violation would be targeted at people who have multiple cars and claim that they are all their own. He suggested that perhaps a 30 -day window would be appropriate for cars that are not registered to property owners. Director Spencer noted that the turnover rate would typically be much quicker than 30 days. Commissioner Strube commented that there is not really an easy solution to the problem, and he supports the proposed amendment. However, he has some reservations about its impacts. Director Spencer reminded the Commission that the City only receives complaints when someone is abusing the opportunity. Commissioner Conley asked if battery charging stations would fall under the definition of "Automobile Service and Repair." Ms. Satter answered no. Charging stations are defined separately. Vice Chair Tift expressed his belief that the proposed definition would give code enforcement some teeth to address problem situations that are reported. There would be no harm associated with those who work on vehicles for friends and neighbors in a respectful way, and these instances would not likely be reported. Director Spencer emphasized that code enforcement is done on a complaint basis, and the Code Enforcement Officer does not actually police neighborhoods. • Automobile Service and Repair (BMC 20.62 General Commercial). Ms. Satter said the CG zone already has a number of auto -related businesses, and these would be nonconforming as the code is currently written. The proposed amendment would correct the problem. Commissioner Goodnow asked if the proposed amendment would address the concerns that were raised by Mr. Yu and Mr. Coslett, and Ms. Satter answered affirmatively. The Commission voiced support for the proposed amendment. Automobile Service and Repair (BMC 20.82 Neighborhood Business). Commissioner Nerf referred to the photographs provided by staff and noted that all of the sites could be improved by having them in use rather than vacant. Buildings in use are always better than derelict buildings. Vice Chair Tift referred to the Noah's Ark area, where an old gas station is located next to the market. Currently, the code would not allow this site to be used as an auto -oriented business. He asked if staff would consider the conditions and character of the surrounding areas before granting approval if the use was allowed with a CUP. Ms. Lambert confirmed that the CUP would require an additional level of review and the use would have to meet specific criteria, which would include compatibility with adjacent properties. Ms. Satter reminded the Commission of the criteria that was proposed by staff that would prohibit the use in the Manette area and restrict the use in other NB zones to existing buildings. At the request of Commissioner Strube, Ms. Satter explained how the CUP process works, noting that there is additional cost associated with the application and an on-site posting would be required and the public would be invited to comment on the proposed use. The CUP process allows the City to condition approval to address potential impacts. Vice Chair Tift asked if the City would have the ability to deny a CUP application. Director Spencer answered that the City could deny a request that fails to meet the criteria to address off-site impacts. Ms. Satter added that, typically, impacts can be mitigated via the CUP process. Commissioner Strube pointed out that there are existing buildings in the Manette area that would also be suitable for an automobile service and repair use. He asked why staff is recommending that the use not be allowed there. Director Spencer reminded the Commission that auto -oriented uses do not really fit in with the "Centers" concept that is outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. There are so few centers left, and the good ones need to be protected. Ms. Satter summarized that staff is recommending that automobile service and repair uses be permitted in NB zones with a CUP, particularly in existing buildings that are suitable for the use. She explained that some buildings have an industrial design that is not really suitable for retail uses. However, staff is not necessarily recommending that the City allow new development to accommodate the use. Commissioner Nerf said he supports the proposed amendment, but he would prefer that the use be limited to existing buildings and not new construction. The remainder of the Commissioners concurred. Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes April 18, 2017 — Page 5 of 7 Attachment C Accessory Dwelling Units. Commissioner Nerf recalled that there has been a lot of talk in Seattle about "tiny homes," some of which have composting toilets rather than being hooked up to sewer. He asked if that would be within the purview of an ADU in Bremerton. Ms. Satter answered no. She explained that, for a number of years, ADUs required separate water and sewer meters which is very cost prohibitive, and this requirement resulted in a number of people creating ADUs illegally. The Public Works Department recently updated the City's general facility charge to acknowledge a single-family home's impact on the City's sewer and water system. The new charge is based off the capacity of the meter rather than the number of units. Most single-family home meters can handle a minimum of two units. That means that ADUs can hook up to an existing meter and there would be no additional cost. However, there will only be one water or sewer bill per meter. Eliminating this additional cost will make it easier for people to develop ADUs. Director Spencer summarized the need to review and update the ADU provisions. The City receives a number of complaints about illegal ADU's, and many of them cannot be made to conform because they cannot meet the current code. One of the City Council's goals is to make quality housing for all, and all housing should be required to go through a permitting process. A primary goal of the update should be to encourage the ADUs that were created in the 1980s to meet the current code requirements so they are considered "quality" housing units. Commissioner Strube asked if it would be possible to allow updates to be done in phases so that landlords can bring the units into compliance over time rather than requiring all the work to be done at the same time. This would give landlords the incentive to make improvements as they can afford them. Ms. Satter said violations of the property maintenance requirements must be immediately addressed. Director Spencer added that it would depend on the changes that are proposed. She agreed to consider this option when creating potential amendments for the Commission's consideration. She said staff spends a lot of time addressing ADU issues, and the number one goal is to create quality housing for residents. The intent is to make the code a little bit easier, but also protect the neighborhoods. Commissioner Goodnow suggested that bringing existing homes up to quality standards is really a separate issue from the new wave of "tiny houses." Perhaps the two should be addressed separately. Director Spencer agreed and said staff has been doing preliminary research regarding "tiny houses." Ms. Satter advised that the proposed amendments would be presented to the Commission for a public hearing at their May meeting. Following the Commission's recommendation, the amendments will be forwarded to the City Council for final adoption. The process will likely take three months to complete. Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes April 18, 2017 — Page 6 of 7 Attachment C Vice Chair Report Vice Chair Tift did not have any items to report. Director Report Director Spencer did not have any additional items to report. She indicated she would print out a quarterly report relative to permits over the last few years. She said staff is getting busy with a number of projects coming on line. Old Business There was no old business. New Business There was no new business. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:52 p.m. Respectively Submitted by: ck Wo , Chair lanning mmission Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes April 18, 2017- Page 7 of 7 Attachment C CITY OF BREMERTON PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING May 16, 2017 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Wofford called the regular meeting of the Bremerton Planning Commission to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present Chair Wofford Vice Chair Tift Commissioner Conley Commissioner Goodnow (arrived at 5:59) Commissioner Jones Commissioner Nerf Commissioner Strube Quorum Certified APPROVAL OF AGENDA Staff Present Andrea Spencer, Director, Department of Community Development Allison Satter, Senior Planner, Department of Community Development Kelli Lambert, Planner, Department of Community Development VICE CHAIR TIFT MOVED TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. COMMISSIONER NERF SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL OF MINUTES VICE CHAIR TIFT MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF APRIL 18, 2017 AS AMENDED. COMMISSIONER STRUBE SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Note: Commissioner Goodnow was not yet present to participate in the vote.) PUBLIC MEETING Call to the Public (public comments on any item not on the agenda) Chair Wofford asked if there were any comments from citizens. Seeing none, he closed the public portion of the meeting. Public Hearing: Amendments to Bremerton Municipal Zoning Code (BMC) Regulations Ms. Lambert reviewed that the Commission held a workshop on April 17th to discuss proposed zoning code amendments. She summarized the zoning code amendments (Attachment I) as follows: Attachment C • Appeals — BMC 20.02.140. Because of an oversight in the existing zoning code regarding who has standing to appeal a land -use decision, a property owner recently had to file two separate appeals. This discrepancy with the State Land Use Petition Act 9 (RCW 36.70C) and the Building Code (BMC 17.04.150) can be corrected with a simple addition to the Appeals code. Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment, which would add "property owner" as a party with standing to appeal. • Fences — BMC 20.46.020. The purpose of this amendment is to remove the ambiguous term "finished." This term is difficult to define. Staff recommends that the entire statement in Item G (All fences shall present a "finished" appearance on their outside face) should be eliminated. There are other codes in place to address property maintenance requirements. Occupied Recreational Vehicles (RVs) — BMC 20.46.050. As discussed at their last meeting, the City's current zoning code allows a property owner to occupy an RV on his/her property for up to a year while constructing a new home. It also allows an RV to be occupied for a cumulative period not to exceed 30 days during any 12 -month period. An RV is a good resource for homeowners who have visitors; but it can also be a problem, and the City has received complaints. The City Council has made addressing this issue a priority, and the Code Enforcement Officer has indicated that it is problematic to track the 30 -day allowance. The proposed amendment would require an RV permit to help track legally - occupied RVs on private property. As proposed, the permit would be available online and, initially, there would be no fee to encourage compliance. In addition to identifying the dates of occupancy, etc., it would also show that the property owner has acknowledged the City's regulations. Automobile Service and Repair — BMC 20.42.040. The proposed amendment would revise the definition of "automobile service and repair" to add an additional sentence that reads, "Servicing and repairing of automobiles on a residential lot for automobiles that are not registered to the property owners or tenants on the site shall be considered automobile service and repair. " The intent of the amendment is to address situations where a property owner or resident in a residential neighborhood does substantial vehicle repairs, with multiple vehicles. The current code does not allow the use in residential zones, but when the Code Enforcement Officer has approached property owners in these situations, she has been told that they are not doing it for money and therefore the code doesn't apply. Automobile Service and Repair — BMC 20.62.020. An outcome of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Update was streamlining and consolidation of the 5 commercial zones, which resulted in unintended consequences in that it removed "automobile service and repair" as a permitted use from all but the Freeway Corridor and Industrial zones. Staff has recently heard from several prospective automobile service and repair businesses that it is difficult to find a location where their businesses can locate. The proposed amendment would allow "automobile service and repair" as an outright permitted use in the General Commercial (CG) zone, which is intended to `provide locations for high-intensity commercial uses serving the entire community. " Automobile Service and Repair — BMC 20.82.040. When considering areas of Bremerton that may be suitable for automobile service and repair, existing buildings that are located in the Neighborhood Business (NB) zone were brought to staff's attention. These buildings were built for industrial or auto -related purposes and are well suited for this type of business. The intent of the NB zone is "to provide for small-scale business districts that reflect the scale and character of surrounding neighborhoods. " Because automobile service and repair can have impacts, staff is not recommending that the use necessarily be allowed outright in the zone. However, staff is recommending that the use be allowed as a conditional use in the NB zone. A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requires an applicant to meet specific criteria before approval, and the City can place conditions on the use to mitigate the impacts. At their last workshop, the Commission agreed that the use might make sense if located in an existing building. Other criteria could include visual screening for parking areas adjacent to residential properties, limiting the hours of business, and prohibiting outdoor storage. In addition, staff is recommending that the use not be allowed in the Manette Neighborhood Center. Ms. Satter explained that ADUs are second, smaller dwelling units on the same grounds of a single-family home, and they can be either attached or detached to the main home. ADUs must provide for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation on the same parcel as the main residence. An ADU provides a complete, independent living facility for one or more people. The concept of ADUs is to promote infill within urban cities. She provided examples of different types of ADUs (detached, attached, and interior conversions). At the end, all structures on the residential property should appear like a single-family Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2017 — Page 2 of 8 Attachment C home rather than an apartment in a single-family neighborhood. She explained that the State's 1993 Housing Policy Act requires cities with a population of over 20,000 and counties with a population of over 125,000 to plan and allow for ADUs. The City adopted the model ordinance that was proposed by the State, but it has the ability to modify the ordinance to address local needs and preferences. Ms. Satter shared examples of ADU's in other jurisdictions, noting that jurisdictions in Oregon have made more strides in incorporating ADU's into their housing stock than those in the State of Washington. She also shared pictures and described the features of a Bremerton ADU she previously lived in across from Kiwanis Park on 5h Street. She explained that the benefits of ADUs include: increasing the community's housing stock without having further land development; facilitating efficient use of existing housing stock and infrastructure; providing an affordable housing option for many low and moderate - income residents; providing more opportunities for small housing options; improving homeowner's cash; and providing more opportunities for people to remain in their homes for longer periods of time. Ms. Satter reviewed that the median gross rent in Bremerton from 2011 to 2015 was $882. As identified in THE KITSAP SUN, rents are significantly rising. In 2016, the median rent was about $1,052. The City Council is concerned about rising rents and the need to provide places for more residents to live. The estimated 2015 household income for Bremerton is about $48,000, and allowing ADUs could provide an additional source of income for City residents. Ms. Satter said concerns have been raised that ADUs are associated with additional renters who do not always care for their properties. In 2005, the rental rate was 60% versus home ownership of 40%, and the argument was that a functioning City should have 60% home ownership and 40% rental. The zoning code was adjusted to encourage more ownership and fewer renters. Since that time, the City has acknowledged that it is a Navy community; and staff has researched home ownership rates in comparable cities (Lakewood, Washington 46%; Everett, Washington 44%; San Diego, California 47%; Gritton/New London, Connecticut 350/o/41%; and Junction City, Kansas 46%). These statistics make it clear that military communities typically have a higher number of units to accommodate renters. Ms. Satter commented that everyone deserves quality housing. The current code prevents people from obtaining permits, but permits are needed to ensure quality construction. If quality housing is not available, the environment and transportation get impacted because people move out further from the places they work. Studies show that children who grow up without housing stability have a greater chance of lower economic success later in life. By the same token, children experiencing housing instability also experience reduced academic outcomes. Housing instability also negatively impacts a person's mental and physical health, and providing housing can lower public health and social service costs. The proposed amendments are intended to be one step towards removing the current impediments to having quality housing. Ms. Satter reviewed the goals and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan related to housing. She summarized that the Housing Element Vision is to "encourage the growth of Bremerton by strategically focusing on a wide variety of housing types throughout the City. " Housing Goal II is to "encourage the development of a variety of new housing options and densities to meet the changing needs of Bremerton's residents. " Housing Goal III is to "support access to quality and affordable housing to all Bremerton's residents. " The supporting policies talk about infill development, providing opportunities for new housing for all (including ADUs), promoting infill projects that are cost efficient and utilize existing utility services, allowing the elderly to remain in their homes as long as possible, and eliminating unnecessary regulatory impediments of development of affordable housing as much as possible. The Land Use Element Vision is that "Bremerton is a metropolitan city that provides for economic vitality and diverse lifestyles through a broad variety of jobs, housing and strategically -located commercial and recreational opportunities. " This includes housing. It is important to adopt standards that help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote infill for areas that are already developed, and allow ADU's that are associated with and subordinate to existing and new single-family dwellings when appropriate. Commissioner Goodnow arrived at 5:59 p.m. Ms. Satter reviewed the proposed amendments related to ADUs as follows: • Remove the owner -occupied requirement — BMC 20.46.010. The current code requires that a property owner must occupy either the ADU or the primary residence of the ADU for a minimum of 6 months out of a year, and staff is proposing to remove this requirement to allow more opportunities for infill. This change will also allow owners with Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2017 — Page 3 of 8 Attachment C historically unapproved ADUs who may have purchased non -conforming structures to make their properties legitimate by obtaining the needed permits. It is difficult for staff to enforce the current provision and verify that ADUs are being used legitimately, especially after a sale of the property. Even though it is required to have a Notice to Title on the property deed, the City's experience is that buyers do not acknowledge the notice in the large stack of closing paperwork. Some concerns have been raised that lax regulations encourage absentee landlords, but there is no evidence to support this claim. The Code Enforcement Officer enforces rental properties, as well as owner -occupied properties, and the City receives code enforcement complaints regarding both. She referred to an online article about Portland's experience with their revised ADU provisions, which remove the owner -occupied requirement. Staff suspects that, even with the proposed code amendment, the split of rental vs. owner properties will remain about the same. Currently, the staff and public spends a lot of hours researching whether or not an ADU is a legal unit, usually for situations that involve financing and often there is no evidence in the City's record of legitimate ADU's. In addition, if a tenant in an ADU reports an unsafe or unhealthy condition, the City requires that the landlord resolve the issue. Once a tenant learns that an ADU is illegal and he/she will have to leave, the complaint is often withdrawn. Once a complaint has been withdrawn, there is not a lot the City can do to get the property owner to bring the unit into compliance. Staff believes the City should consider opportunities to encourage property owners to bring the units into compliance. Setbacks requirements for ADUs — BMC 20.46.010.a. Most ADUs will be located in the Low -Density Residential (R-10) zone, where the current setback requirements are 15 feet in the front, 15 feet in the rear, and 5 feet on each side. Staff is proposing that detached ADU's be required to meet the same setbacks that are allowed for garages, which are considered accessory structures. Garages off alleyways can have a 0 -rear setback and just 3 feet on each side. A 3 -foot rear setback would be required on properties that are not located on an alleyway. The intent is to promote ADU's on top of garages. A 15 -foot front setback would still be required. • Who can have an ADU — BMC 20.46.010.c. The current code allows only one ADU on a residential lot, and this would not change. The proposed amendment is intended to clarify the limitation that only two units are allowed on a property. For example, a lot that already has a duplex would not be allowed to have an ADU, as well. Manufactured homes — BMC 20.46.010.d. A provision was added to allow manufactured homes as ADUs provided they comply with the design criteria for ADUs and with the provisions for manufactured homes found in BMC 20.46.040. The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent to make ADUs more subordinate to the primary residence. She noted that there is a demand for tiny homes, which could be permitted as an ADU. However, the International Building Code (IBC) requires that housing must be placed on a permanent foundation. Roll up homes (wheels and chassis) will still be allowed, but they must comply with the City's RV standards. Maximum and minimum requirements — BMC 20.46.010.e. Staff is proposing three revisions to this section: Remove maximum size of 1,000 square feet, remove minimum size of 300 square feet, and acknowledge upstairs/downstairs flats as ADUs. As proposed, ADU's must be secondary dwelling units that are subordinate to the primary unit and are limited to 60% of the primary unit's habitable floor area. These changes will address tiny homes, which can be as small as 96 square feet. It will also help accommodate ADUs on top of garages and address situations where property owners install "fake" walls in order to pass inspection and reduce livable area. The proposal is to maintain the 60% (of the primary residence) size limitation, with no specific maximum or minimum identified. In an attempt to address older homes that have already been converted into two units, one upstairs and another downstairs, staff is proposing an amendment that will allow equal square footage for the principal unit and the ADU if the ADU is located completely on a single floor of the existing structure constructed before January 1, 2017. The idea is to encourage owners of existing ADUs to bring them up to code and obtain the necessary permits. Design standards — BMC 20.46.010.f. The current design standards for ADUs only have three provisions: ADUs must be constructed of similar materials as the principal unit, roofs must be the same pitch or greater, and the height cannot be more than 25% taller than the principal building. Staff is proposing to revise the design criteria to ensure compatibility with the surrounding neighborhoods. The proposed design criterion contains a list of 12 architecturally unique design elements, and the applicant of an ADU will need to incorporate at least 4 of the 12 to construct an ADU. The options include recessed entryways, dormers, gables, covered porches, offsets in building face or roof, bay windows, decorative cornices and rooflines, and shutters. The amendment would also allow a developer to propose an alternative feature that provides visual relief similar to the options listed. Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2017 — Page 4 of 8 Attachment C On-site parking — BMC 20.46.010.h. Although paved parking areas and driveways are already required in another section of the code, additional language was added to the ADU section to make the requirement clear and reduce confusion and misunderstandings. Utilities — BMC 20.46.010.j. The City recently changed its utility code, and property owners are no longer required to add a new water meter to a property to accommodate an ADU. However, it would remain an option so that property owners can charge the residents of both units separately. Adding a water meter is costly (about $10,000 to $12,000). The revised code allows a property owner to add an additional unit without providing another water meter, if the existing meter has sufficient capacity. To clarify the requirement, staff is proposing additional language that every ADU must be served by City water and sewer/septic system. Currently, people are promoting composting and incinerator toilets, which are allowed in the City. However, they cannot be considered the primary source within an ADU. Ms. Satter summarized that staff is proposing flexibility in the ADU code, which allows for better utilization of existing infrastructure, accommodates more people and dollars into the community and promotes more quality housing. It is important to remember that Bremerton is the metropolitan city of Kitsap County, and it is expected to be an urban, dense environment. Staff understands there are neighborhood concerns that allowing ADUs in residential neighborhoods will reduce property values, but there is no evidence to back up these concerns. In fact, studies show that the resale value of a property will increase if an ADU is added. There is also concern that non-resident landlord properties will be neglected, but there is no evidence to support the claim. The proposed amendment supports the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies for quality housing, provides a variety of housing options, and has a potential to reduce the number of non -conforming properties. Because the proposed amendments to the ADU provisions are new and different and there could be unintended consequences, Ms. Satter said staff will provide a report to the Planning Commission no later than 18 months from the time the provisions are adopted. This will allow the Commission an opportunity to evaluate how well the provisions work and recommend amendments as needed. Chair Wofford opened the public hearing. There was no one in the audience who indicated a desire to participate, and Chair Wofford closed the public hearing. He invited the Commissioners to share their thoughts on the proposed amendments as follows: • Appeals — BMC 20.02.140. The Commissioners did not have any comments or questions regarding these amendments. • Fences — BMC 20.46.020. The Commissioners did not have any comments or questions regarding these amendments. • Occupied Recreational Vehicles (RVs) — BMC 20.46.050. Vice Chair Tift asked if the City would permit an RV to be occupied for more than 30 days. Ms. Lambert answered that occupancy of more than 30 days would only be allowed in situations where a property owner is constructing a home. If a building permit has been issued for the property, the owner can occupy an RV for up to 1 year while the home is being built. As currently written, there would be no other circumstance that would allow someone to occupy an RV for more than 30 days. Commissioner Goodnow asked if the provision would pertain to the property or the RV. For example, would each different RV on a property be allowed a 30 -day occupancy? He cautioned against allowing property owners to operate a type of Airbnb for RV's in their driveways. Ms. Lambert answered that the provision is intended to pertain to the property, and not to individual RVs that might be located on the property throughout the year. Ms. Satter added that only one RV is allowed on each lot. Vice Chair Tift asked how often a homeowner could obtain an occupancy permit for an RV. Ms. Lambert answered that the current language would limit occupancy to a total of 30 days, and only one RV could obtain an RV permit. However, the 30 -day occupancy could be spread throughout the 12 month period. • Automobile Service and Repair — BMC 20.62.020, BMC 20.82.040, and BMC 20.42.040. The Commissioners did not have any comments or questions regarding these amendments. Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2017 — Page 5 of 8 Attachment C Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) — BMC 20.46.010. Commissioner Conley referred to the proposed amendments in BMC 20.46.010.a and asked if an ADU would be allowed to locate on top of a garage that does not comply with the current setback requirements of the zone. Are their provisions for grandfathering in these structures? Ms. Satter explained that the non -conforming provisions try to get things into conformance. If a property owner is proposing changes or repairs to a structure that equate to more than 75% of its value, the current code requires that the garage be built to meet all code requirements. Director Spencer clarified that the non -conforming provisions require that the ADU would not increase the non-conformance. For example, you could do an ADU on top of a garage that is non- conforming, but the ADU portion of the building would have to meet the setback requirements. That means it might need to be stepped in from the property line. Vice Chair Tift asked if community covenants that limit the number of homes on each property to one would take precedence over the ADU ordinance. Director Spencer answered affirmatively. She explained that the use would be permitted by City code, but the City does not enforce community covenants. Staff tries to notify applicants when their current covenants do not allow ADU's, if we are aware of the restriction. Commissioner Goodnow referred to RVs being used on residential properties versus tiny homes on trailers. He asked if someone could make the case that their RV is a tiny home on a trailer. Ms. Satter answered that tiny homes are considered RVs if they have wheels and therefore the RV provisions would apply. In order for a tiny home to be considered an ADU, it would have to be connected to a permanent foundation and the chassis would need to be removed. Commissioner Goodnow asked if there is way for someone to permanently occupy a tiny home on a trailer in Bremerton. Ms. Satter answered that it would be considered an RV, and the 30 -day occupancy limit, if adopted, would apply. Commissioner Goodnow commented that tiny homes seem to be growing in popularity and need to be addressed. Ms. Satter noted that they would be allowed in mobile home parks, and manufactured parks can be located in low-density residential zones. Director Spencer said the proposed ADU amendments are intended to allow the City to proceed cautiously. Removing the owner -occupancy requirement for ADUs is a sensitive topic, and staff wants to ensure that the resulting ADU units are quality and do not compromise the fabric of the neighborhoods. Any housing in the neighborhoods should be permanent. Tiny homes rolled into backyards are not intended to be a true housing solution, at this point, especially with the removal of the owner -occupancy requirement. Commissioner Nerf clarified that, as proposed, the provision in BMC 20.46.010.e, which pertains to splitting a house into two units (primary residence and ADU), would apply to properties constructed before January 1, 2017. Does that mean that the structure had to exist before that time, or that the division had to exist before that time. Ms. Satter said it means that the structure had to exist before that time frame, not the ADU split, and is not intended to apply to new construction. Chair Wofford asked if ADU's would be required to meet the City's current limitations on impervious surfaces. Ms. Satter answered affirmatively. She referred to BMC 20.46.010.A, which requires that ADUs comply with the development standards of the underlying zone, including setbacks, lot coverage, and height. The lot coverage limitation for most residential zones is 60%. This requirement will be a limiting factor for a number of properties in the City, especially when 3 parking spaces are required for the ADU and primary residence. Chair Wofford noted that, as proposed, an ADU could connect to the septic system that is in place for the primary residence. He asked if it would be appropriate to require an ADU to be hooked to a sewer line if one runs by the property. Ms. Satter said that, as per the current provision, a property that is within 200 feet of a sewer line must hook up to the sewer line when adding a new unit or the septic system fails. That means that, even if a primary residence is served by an existing septic system, a new ADU would be required to hook up to sewer. Chair Wofford recalled that in her presentation, Ms. Satter referred to ADUs as granny flats, in-law apartments, etc. These terms infer that the main unit will be owner -occupied. He said he supports retaining the owner -occupancy requirement. Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2017 — Page 6 of 8 Attachment C Commissioner Goodnow requested clarification about the requirement that ADU's must have paved driveways and parking spaces. Ms. Satter said the definition of a "paved surface" is a surface that is constructed of bounded materials. That means it cannot be gravel or rocks. A property owner has several options, including pervious pavement, and the 3 required parking spaces must each be at least 8' x 18'. VICE CHAIR TIFT MOVED TO RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE BREMERTON MUNICIPAL CODE (BMC) AS DETAILED IN ATTACHMENT 1, BASED UPON THE STAFF REPORT AND THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS PRESENTED IN ATTACHMENT II. COMMISSIONER GOODNOW SECONDED THE MOTION. Chair Wofford suggested that the motion be amended to exclude the proposed amendment to BMC 20.46.010, which would eliminate the owner -occupancy requirement for ADUs. Commissioner Goodnow clarified that the current requirement is that the primary residence or ADU must be owner -occupied for at least 6 months each calendar year. Ms. Satter said it is not uncommon for property owners to mislead the City about occupancy, and the requirement is very difficult to enforce. Even though a Notice on Title is required, the current standard practice is for both units to be rented. None of the other Commissioners indicated support for an amendment to the motion, but Director Spencer noted that the City Council would be advised of Chair Wofford's concerns about owner occupancy via a minority report. She agreed that this is a concern, and that is why staff is recommending an evaluation check 18 months after code adoption. Chair Wofford suggested that it might be difficult to reinstate the owner -occupancy requirement at a later date. Vice Chair Tift expressed his belief that the proposed amendments related to ADUs could have unintended consequences, and it will be important for staff to report back to the Commission after a period of time. Director Spencer expressed her belief that the risk/reward associated with the proposed amendments will be worth it. People are doing this already, and the changes may encourage them to obtain the required permits and get people into quality housing units. However, staff is absolutely committed to providing a report. THE MOTION, AS STATED, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. BUSINESS MEETING Chair Report Chair Wofford did not have any items to report. Director Report Director Spencer reviewed permit statistics, which are a good indicator of the value of new construction. In April, the City issued permits that were valued at $3.8 million, more than the previous two year combined (2015 was $1.9 million and 2016 was $744,000). February was a similar story. This is an indication that permit activity is heating up and will likely get hotter based on inquiries staff is receiving. Director Spencer said staff has been following online "Region of Boom" stories on KUOW, which talk about the growth trends in Puget Sound outside of Seattle. She received an email from KUOW, that Bremerton will be the next area highlighted, and she and Ms. Satter were interviewed last week for their radio program, along with other members of the community. The story will be published in late June or early July. She said Bremerton is a great community that is different than anywhere else. She worries about gentrification and what the influx of money from King County will mean for the community. It is important for the City to improve its codes so it gets the right kind of housing stock for all of its residents. She voiced appreciation to the Commissioners for their willingness to entertain amendments to the ADU provisions, which step outside their box of comfort. She felt the changes would be good for the City's future. Old Business There was no old business. Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2017 — Page 7 of 8 Attachment C New Business Commissioner Nerf reported that he recently attended a seminar on Homelessness that was sponsored by the League of Women Voters. At the event, references were made to wooden tents, which are sometimes referred to as tiny houses. He suggested it would be good for the City to clearly understand what the terms mean and have some provisions in place for these types of housing units. Director Spencer said she has been struggling with this issue a lot because there is not clarity. She is scheduled to meet with Kitsap County's DCD Director to learn more about what the terns mean and what infrastructure needs to be in place to support the units. Commissioner Goodnow said he recently read that a number of tiny homes were constructed for the homeless on the waterfront in Port Orchard. Director Spencer said she is trying to understand more about how the county is permitting the "tiny houses," which appear to be constructed similarly to storage sheds. While she understands that they offer an inexpensive solution, it does not seem right to ask someone to live in that kind of condition. Commissioner Goodnow acknowledged that it is a step up from a tent or tarp behind a building. Commissioner Jones said her daughter worked for the Low -Income Housing Institute in Seattle, which has an entire program for tiny houses. She suggested staff could fmd some valuable information from the institute's website. The homes in Seattle look more like houses than sheds, but they were small. Director Spencer said the tiny homes in Seattle all have their own facilities inside, which seems to be the right solution. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:54 p.m. Respectively Submitted by: ck Wofford, Chair r j Planning Commission Bremerton Planning Commission Minutes May 16, 2017 -- Page 8 of 8 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 3, 2017 0:36 AM To: Marlena Marie' Cc: City Council Subject: RE: Citizen Support - Ordinances relating to Block Parties and "War Boxes" (Marlena Marie) Attachments: JULY S, 2017.pdf Ms. Marie, This is to acknowledge receipt of your e-mail, which has Been provided to the Council Mernbers for their review and. consideration. it will also be included as a hart of the record under General Business Item SB 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-riiiil wAs aiso 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. Christine Grenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-52$0 City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us www.BremertonWA.go� . '. From: Marlena Marie[mailto:6centsmarketing@gmail.comj 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 Bern and Raised in Kitsap and New Resident/Owner @ 2005&2007 6th Street. From: Lori Smith on behalf of City Council Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 12:47 PM To: City Council Subject: FW: Citizen Letter - Supports ADU Setbacks (Dana & Ben Sheppard) Attn: Council Members (FYI) From: Allison Satter Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 12:02 PM To: City Council City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us> Subject, FW: July 19 vote on ADU setbacks Can you please make this part of the record for tonight's meeting: Citizen Letter of Support for Zoning Code Amendment to the ADU Provisions. From: tallchick6@gmail.com [mailto:tallchick6@gmail.com1 Sent: Saturday, July 08, 2017. 1:10 PM To: Allison Satter CAllison.Satter@ei.bremerton.wa.us> Subject: July 19 vote on ADU setbacks Hello Allison, I've become aware that the City Council will be voting on whether to change ADU rear/side yard setbacks to 3'. I'm writing to let you know that my husband and I are in favor of this change. We are in the process of purchasing a property in Manette and would like to build a garage with an apartment above it. The property is long and narrow, so having a 3' setback from the rear property line would enable us to do this. I'm sure our lot is not the only one in the city that has constraints of existing structures and challenging dimensions. Changing the ADU setbacks would enable more ADU's to built, which will provide more affordable housing units in the city, which is sorely needed. If there is anything else we cn do to support this change in the setbacks, please let us know. Thank you, Dana Sheppard and Ben Sheppard 360-981-5340 Sent from Windows Mail 1 {'r c I T-M—b a F -rid I, N• L Q N Q E n N O QD N O N m � 00 > •� a�-0 7(3)0E0 O a� O � � � • � �, O � O U �O O 0-0 O 0 ?: 70 E C: •�Q O =0 �U �� 7C) 3LL U) c O O O Np �•- 4)�� O0O Q(D D O (� Q� Q cn — N O ON O O N cn N O-0 N U O (a) O�� OOH �O O�O N>1 0'N—, O� 00 O� ��O �'E �O �O Qu MOUE w> Lu LL Q OQ E n N O QD N O N m � A z m m I N N Q 0 3 J 3 J A O U . . CD O } V O 'Q p 00 0 V>1 0-0 0 (Y) O .5<- o�o :�i CLO Q:� 0 O E OO LO= U E U 0 0 (1) - C� U =QO .� •� � 0 O (Y) s p. U U U O� O CY) 0 cn cn O pp 000�� o•ppQ0�U0 U o• N Q 0-M Al W N O O O O� U O N C45 >1 � � 3 �O O U O � O E O >. O O Lo V � N -- O N � O O O � N O- � Q_O � Q Q O m N O _O Q O O Q O O LO O N O E O U O O O O O LO O O O � O LU No E O U � N O N O � O U >. O N � � 00co N O .� Q o Q O LO CN DL D >1 �o � U O O � U Nn N O o1 Cd a Q 3 Q) E O LO O ME co LO a� a 9 N Wi a� 0 E z U O O 3 z I I N cco 0 � 0 O O LO LO O rp000 o Q � o c � o � � o z= 0 � 0 O O LO LO O O D cn o o O O CD • � I I \ 'o 'U o O U � O Lr) O N O O 0 0 � 0 O O LO LO O 0 N t C � � U C � N � Q vii 0 0 z a ra Im m _Ann „M Y .' to � — E Q O 0 UD 0 0 0 O a ra Im m _Ann „M Y .' 0 W 4- O N Q Q .0 o C O Q O N O X 7C) 4) •` 2 � D c O _O O p O � ,E O .. D Q _ 7C) Q (1) O x Q o O U�� O n 4- .0 o C O N O X 7C) O •` 2 � O � O _O O p (LD- � 3 O � U _ 7C) Q x o � p U � O Q � OU _ O Z O O O V) aP-rid- 4..� 0 3� O E ��O��OU> 07 -0 u ��o��moo-00-0 V)•" .LD a o O.0 "-c -0 0 E = U (1) 0• U Lu .- X.§ C) x 0 u 0 c c -F,- -F,- c < LU au) " ::) U 0 '4 1 c � N � c U QO ' �► � 7 *i �Apf p.. '4 1 U N O Q N Q O t Q V C } } C Q U Is O O � V � O Q � � O O } � O.0 � U � O � O O � � O � O O Is � rl — nL W � O � O O •U O O � Q U O (1) O � O O o� Ute•- U � 0 _>1 CT O E O E m 00 rm i O N () O .O N 4- E 0 E 4— n , O O vc) E -o uW 0 (L) (DO) D 0- C C)7 o ry U } U UO Wil 60 A'i' q- 0 O .O O E 4- 0 0- E o� .� � i U � o o� O O 4-- Q) -0 °C:O o o °' ,o E ZZ- U } �•Q)� 00 0 0�� a� 0- 0 Q) D . ° .� U E } E�� 0 3 00 ,O �o a)a)CLu °� Q U�U"' U �w U� 00 ,O EO <„ _ J�O 0 0 O 0 E E•`n aj O u Q) E.o O o Q) ��o 0o— Q V E >0 No oU-0 ��. 0 EC)6 V moo- 2<CN 0 0 U N O OO -F► .E O Q y - Q) O -- -C: O O Q) O U 0 s'- O Q) Q) E Q) E o -�- a) U � O O O oQQ) Z: 0� O � O O •c 3 !Z� V o E Vm � •U LO Q co O LO V� c� O c O Lp o DQ) C) = No co r� U 0 Q) 0 E 0 C: 0 7()0 C: Q) E E 0 U N O .so 57 0 U 0 c 0 N nek 0 Q AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: Ordinance No. 5331 to amend Chapter 11.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) entitled "Sidewalk and Street Frontage" 7A Study Session Date: July 12, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: Julv 19. 2017 Department: PW&U Presenter: Tom Knuckey Phone: (360) 473-2376 SUMMARY: The proposed revisions to the Bremerton Municipal Code allow the Director of Public Works & Utilities to enter into agreements with property owners to complete repairs to sidewalks, curb and gutters, curb ramps and driveway approaches that abut private property. These agreements are intended to allow the City to partner with property owners and share the cost of repairs when the City has determined pedestrian facilities abutting a property are hazardous or defective, and require repair or replacement. Other changes to Chapter 11.08 of the BMC clarify existing language. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Ordinance No. 5331 FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Revenue to fund expenditures resulting from the cost share agreements will be from the Sidewalk Abatement Fund 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. 5331 to amend Chapter 11.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Sidewalk and Street Frontage". COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve Form Updated 01/07/15 ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action ORDINANCE NO. 5331 AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington, amending Chapter 11.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Sidewalks and Street Frontage." WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Chapter 11.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Sidewalks and Street Frontage" in order to simplify the language, address the need for ADA compliance, and allow the Public Works Director to enter into agreements with property owners to make sidewalk repairs; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION]. Chapter 11.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Sidewalks and Street Frontage" is hereby amended to read as follows: Chapter 11.08 SIDEWALK AND STREET FRONTAGE 11.08.010 PURPOSE. This chapter further defines the requirements and procedures to maintain sidewalks and other street frontage improvements as outlined in Chapters 35.68 and 35.69 RCW, said ,.i aptefs which are adopted by reference as currentiv enacted and as hereafter amended. 11.08.015 DEFINITIONS. The following definitions apply to this chapter. (a) "Sidewalk" means any and all pedestrian structures or forms of improvement for pedestrians included in the space between the street margin, as defined by a curb or the edge of the traveled road surface, and the line where the public ri t -of -way meets the abutting property, as set forth in RCW 35.69.010. The term "sidewalk" includes but is not limited to curbs, gutters, and portions of driveways that cross sidewalks. (b) "Driveway," where set forth separately from "sidewalk" in this chapter, means all portions of a driveway crossing City ri _ t-of-wa. 11.08.020 RESPONSIBILITIES. Street frontage must be maintained in accordance with City standards. Permits may be required to undertake the work required in this chapter. 11.08.030 SIDEWALK AND STREET FRONTAGE MAINTENANCE STANDARDS. (a) It shall be the duty of every owner of of property abutting on public right- of-way to keep sidewalks free of snow, ice, garbage cans, and all other obstructions_ef etie Sidewalk & Street Frontage ebjee6enable thing. It shall be unlawful 60H401 of abt4tifig "E)H afly P41ie Stfeet, Fight of Way, OF alley, OF befleath Stteh p4lie in- the City to construct, place, cause, create, maintain, or permit to remain upon any sidewalk any condition that constitutes a hazard, 4Pde4 e, e „>,:o t a�,,,� �r oto the normal use of said sidewalk by the public. Facilities which have a poor apearance but are otherwise physically sound shall not be considered hazardous. . as ensat said jttfl,.t; (5)Pe f etive ndi6ens on the planting �� ;r• the r4ght of way between the ettA line et:, if thet:e is tie ettA line, then between the ad ffeent edge (9)Sidewalks in violation of current Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") accessibility guidelines,; and/or sidewalks with one or more missing sections including (IO)N4iss ag Lt:A—ns Aer sidewalk be enstpdete Whefe *portions of any street i-s missing sidewalk along the entire frontage , it shall be corrected the- by of-the abutting property owner. to eemplete the sidewalk,ett4 and gt4tef. 'le to eee"Y and make g ,-al ttse .,fpf:.,pel4y () In tho baso of apartmont he sos r99ming he sos GeaFts an-d— similar tt ng tt Pe tefffl tt tt 11.08.040 ENFORCEMENT - NOTICE OF VIOLATION. (a) Upon finding that an owner ^pis maintaining or allowing a condition prohibited in this chapter, the City Code Enforcement Officer or City Engineer may order the repair, reconstruction, replacement, cleaning, removal, or remedy of the condition or obstruction. Sidewalk & Street Frontage (b) Enforcement pursuant to Chapter 1.04 BMC may be used in lieu of or in conjunction with the provisions of this chapter. (c) Notice of the violation and required corrective action shall be sent to the legal owner of the abutting property, pursuant to BMC 1.04.040 or RCW 35.68.030 or 35.69.030, as applicable, to repair or replace the sidewalk. . 11.08.050 PERMIT REQUIRED - APPLICATION - ASSESSMENT - LIEN. (a) Upon notification, the owner, -ager+, of lessee shall obtain a permit from the City to correct the sidewalk deficiency. No person, firm or corporation shall construct or reconstruct any esidewalk or driveway on public rights-of-way without first obtaining a permit from the City. After sixty (60) calendar days, if the owner, agent, of lessee has not applied for a permit to correct the sidewalk deficiency, the City Council may, following a public hearing, assess a lien on the property for the expense of correcting the deficiency pursuant to BMC 11.08.080. (b) In the event the owner, agent, of lessee obtains a permit within the time prescribed above, but the corrections are not completed within two hundred forty (240) calendar days of receiving the permit, the City Council may, following a public hearing, assess a lien on the property for the expense of correcting the deficiency. 11.08.060 DRIVEWAYS. (a) Upon receipt of an application and payment of all fees, the City may issue a permit to construct a driveway meeting City standards. The City Engineer may revoke any driveway permit or require a modification of any driveway if: (1) The area occupied by the driveway is needed for the public convenience; (2) Continued operation of the driveway interferes with the safe and orderly flow of pedestrians, bicycles or vehicular traffic; (3) The abutting owner has failed to comply with all specifications and conditions of the permit; (4) The driveway does not access legal parking and maneuvering space on abutting property; or (5) The driveway does not meet current ADA accessibility guidelines. (b) Within sixty (60) calendar days of written notice from the City Engineer to close or modify a driveway, the abutting property owner shall obtain any required permits and make the corrections. It the abutting owner fails to make the required corrections within sixty (60) calendar days, the City may perform the required work at the expense of the abutting owner and assessment costs as provided in this chapter. 11.08.070 CONSTRUCTION, RECONSTRUCTION AND REPAIR - RESOLUTION OF NECESSITY - LIABILITY OF ABUTTING PROPERTY. (a) Whenever a portion of any street in any city is not improved by the construction of a sidewalk thereon, or the sidewalk thereon is has bo,.eme ,,,,r;* of ttas f hazardous for purposes of public travel and the City Council by resolution, pursuant to Chapter 35.68 or 35.69 RCW as applicable, finds that the improvement of such portion of such street by the construction,. of -reconstruction or repair of a sidewalk thereon is necessary for the public safety and convenience, the duty, burden, and expense of such workeenst -ueting of ,-eeefist ,,,.ting stte , sidewalk shall devolve upon the property directly abutting upon such portion except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section pursuant to RCW 35.69.020. Sidewalk & Street Frontage (b) An abutting property shall not be charged with any costs of ,.„..thee" .r e ,,,,s,,.,,etio,, under this chapter in excess of fifty (50) percent of the valuation of such abutting property, exclusive of improvements thereon, according to the valuation last placed upon it for purposes of general taxation. (c) An abutting property shall not be charged with any costs of eatistri,erian e ,,nstr,,etio,, under this chapter if the construction,or-reconstructionor repair is required to correct deterioration of or damage to the sidewalk that is the direct result of actions by the City or its agents or to correct deterioration of or damage to the sidewalk that is the direct result of the failure of the City to enforce its ordinances. 11.08.080 ASSESSMENT OF LIENS. The City Council may, following a public hearing, assess a lien on the property for the cost and expense of construction, reconstruction, and/or correcting the deficiency as authorized and pursuant to Chapter 35.68 or 35.69 RCW as applicable. 11.08.090 SIDEWALK ABATEMENT FUND CREATED. The sidewalk abatement fund is hereby created. The sidewalk abatement fund shall receive revenue from proceeds of lien settlements as outlined in BMC 11.08.080, and other revenue. All funds deposited into the sidewalk abatement fund shall be used solely for correcting deficiencies in sidewalks and driveways. 11,08,095 REPAIRS PURSUANT TO AGREEMENT. (1) The Director of Public Works and Utilities is authorized to enter into agreements with owners of abutting property for the repair of any sidewalk determined to be defective or hazardous. The agreement shall be written, shall include a cost estimate, and shall define the extent of costs, if any, to be contributed by the City. (2) The City may participate in sidewalk repair, if there are available funds in the Sidewalk Abatement Fund, only where there is no indication of negligence or misuse by the property owner, past or present, causing the defect. 11.08.100 COSTS. Whenever any construction, reconstruction or repair of any sidewalk is to be done, the costs -of the same may be paid as follows: (1) The abutting owner may construct the correction or improvement at i is ier ,..,r eost of expeffse-using a private contractor after obtaining a City permit. The cost will either be whollv at the owner's expense_ or with contribution from the Citv if an asireement pursuant to BMC 11.08.095 is in place; (2) The abutting owner may request the City construct the correction or improvement and reimburse the City directly; or (3) The City may construct the improvement and assess the costs thereof against the abutting property owner. 11.08.110 VIOLATION - PENALTY. I Sidewalk & Street Frontage (a) Any violation of any provision of this chapter constitutes a civil violation under Chapter 1.04 BMC for which a monetary penalty may be assessed and abatement and/or enforcement may be required as provided therein. (b) In addition to or as an alternative to any other penalty provided in this chapter or by law, any person who violates any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor pursuant to Chapter 1.12 BMC. Each day, or a portion thereof, during which a violation occurs shall constitute a separate violation. SECTION 2. 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. ATTEST: PATTY LENT, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: SHANNON CORIN, City Clerk ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney PUBLISHED the day of 2017. EFFECTIVE the day of 2017. ORDINANCE NO. 5 Sidewalk & Street Frontage IL low Ln i 4J V � U J O0 _0 O O }, U �. v - v O 0 _ 0 O O � r U O L v v .4- ■ 0 �n 0 +-+ �O oOLn i :� E cn � O m v VO c +-j �l r E V O � U 0 ca v C LA °' Ln ru W V +� O Oru W v� s� -0 C)O ru _0 cn 0in< — -F- Ln tit lk" r # AL y r, Ln X Q1 z O -0 - -Z-,- rB iL O Lf) 4 -+rB Oaj u > �_ Q aj aJ 4- 0 i +J — 0 r aj u r ro _u vi 4-J O aJ a C)L U-) -C - O ra 4 -j4 -J u u aJ v c_n E aJ u O OJ aj— � � � Ln p,O4- w ra u O r) SUBJECT: Acceptance of the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee's Recommendations for FY -2018 Funding Allocations AGENDA BILL CITY OF BREMERTON 7B CITY COUNCIL Study Session Date: July 12, 2017 COUNCIL MEETING Date: July 19, 2017 Department: Presenter: Phone: City Council Pat Sullivan, LTAC Chair (360) 473-5280 SUMMARY: The City of Bremerton anticipates approximately $830,000 in revenue will be available for distribution in Fiscal Year 2018. The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) received eighteen (18) requests for funding. Following the interview process, one request was withdrawn. Committee members reached consensus, and are recommending funding to 17 applicants and to continue the City of Bremerton's commitment to the Kitsap Conference Center and the Admiral Theatre Foundation. Recommended allocations include $315,000 for non-profit organizations. It is also recommended that $250,000 be allocated for operations at Kitsap Conference Center for 5 - years, and $95,000 for a one-time debt service payment. The City of Bremerton has a 50 -year commitment ending in 2040 with the Admiral Theatre Foundation for $90,000 per year, plus an additional $60,000 per year through 2017. The committee recommends that this additional funding commitment be continued through 2022 for a total allocation of $150,000. Finally, it is recommended that $20,000 (unallocated by the committee) be carried over as part of the beginning fund balance for Fiscal Year 2018. ATTACHMENTS: 1) Summary of LTAC Recommendations for2018 2) Staff Memorandum 3) Lodging Tax — Frequently Asked Questions (MRSC) 4) Funding History FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): RCW 67.28 specifies that a municipality may either accept or reject the committee's recommendations. If any individual recommendation is rejected by City Council, then the unallocated amount will be held in the fund's reserve and that unfunded organization will have significantly reduced marketing efforts for Bremerton. STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ❑ No Presentation x❑ Full Presentation STUDY SESSION ACTION: ❑ Consent Agenda x❑ General Business ❑ Public Hearing RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to accept the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee's recommendations as presented; and to include the allocations in the City of Bremerton's Fiscal Year 2018 Proposed Budget. COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ Approve ❑ Deny ❑ Table ❑ Continue ❑ No Action Form Updated 01/07/15 BREMERTON LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2018 Name of Organization Requests Recommended Allocations Bremerton Historic Ships Association $66,000 $66,000 Washington State Science and Engineering Fair (WSSEF) $45,000 $45,000 Visit Kitsap Peninsula $48,000 $40,000 Bremerton Chamber of Commerce $38,000 $32,000 Bremerton Symphony Association $25,000 $25,000 Kitsap County Historical Society & Museum $24,000 $24,000 Downtown Bremerton Association Rock the Dock Concerts $20,000 $20,000 Downtown Bremerton Association WayzGoose Kitsap $30,000 $20,000 Kitsap Entrepreneurial Center Kitsap Harbor Festival $12,000 $12,000 Olympic College Foundation Kitsap Wine Festival $10,000 $10,000 Valentinetti Puppet Museum $7,000 $7,000 Kitsap Pride Network Kitsap Pride $5,000 $5,000 West Sound Art & Music Association Ukelele Festival $5,000 $5,000 Dominion Historical Workboat Association $4,000 $4,000 City of Bremerton Kitsap Conference Center Operations $250,000 $250,000 City of Bremerton Kitsap Conference Center Debt Service $95,000 $95,000 Admiral Theatre Foundation $150,000 $150,000 Beginning Fund Balance/Reserve $20,000 $852,000 $830,000 CITY COUNCIL 345 6T" Street, Suite 600, Bremerton, WA 98337-1873 (360) 473-5280 To: Council Members Mayor Patty Lent Financial Services Director DeWayne Pitts From: Christine Grenier, Council/Auditor Assistant Date: July 7, 2017 RE: City of Bremerton Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) Recommendations Appropriate uses for funding are specified in RCW 67.28 which include marketing, tourism promotion, and operating expenditures related to tourism promotion. Tourists are defined as those who travel more than 50 miles. Cities may use the funds for the same purposes as non-profit organizations as well as capital expenditures related to tourism. The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee received eighteen (18) requests for funding for Fiscal Year 2018. After reviewing the applications and holding interviews with each of the applicants, the committee discussed and reached consensus on its recommendations to City Council. Following the interview process, one (1) request was withdrawn which was due to pending non-profit status. These recommendations are subject to Council review and approval. City Council may only fund organizations listed in the recommendations, and can accept or reject funding for each of the applicants. Per RCW 67.28.1817 (2), should council wish to award funding in a different amount than recommended, up to the amount of the request, any changes may be provided to the committee for comment 45 days before final action. Lastly, these recommendations are based on the assumption that adequate revenue will be available to meet contract obligations. From the approximate $830,000 anticipated to be available in 2018, the committee recommends: $315,000 to 17 non-profit organizations promoting tourism and special events $250,000 to the Kitsap Conference Center for Operations through 2022 $95,000 to the Kitsap Conference Center for Debt Payment $150,000 to the Admiral Theatre Foundation through 2022 $20,000 to the Fund Reserve Bremerton Historic Ships Association Requested $66,000 Recommended Allocation $66,000 The Bremerton Historic Ships Association (BHSA) operates tours onboard the USS Turner Joy and a gift shop on the Louis Mentor Boardwalk. Visitors may take an onsite ship tour, go aboard for special events, or visit as part of a package. The Turner Joy received over 41,000 visitors and from that amount, over 34,000 are considered "tourists", those who travel from more than 50 miles away or stay overnight. The website http:I jussturnerjo� y.org/ includes mobile functionality as well as links to other local attractions and hotels to assist event planners. A concierge map is also provided to tourists staying overnight in Seattle with Bremerton and the Turner Joy included as a destination. Rack cards are available on the Washington State Ferries. Collaboration for marketing includes Kitsap Harbor Tours, Navy League, Naval Museum, Bremerton Chamber of Commerce, Naval Undersea Museum, Washington State Ferries, Seattle Premier Attractions and Visit Seattle. Packages are promoted to military reunion groups, Girl and Boy Scouts, and to groups hosting special events or ceremonies. Historic Ships also ties into STEM activities as part of the Washington State Science and Engineering Fair. Marketing includes rack cards on board ferries and across the region, boardwalk and highway signs, ads through Kitsap Guide, brochures and maps through Seattle Premier Attractions and Visit Seattle, and online with Trip Advisor and Facebook. Funding would be used to continue marketing efforts plus expansion to all ferry routes, Seattle Premier Attractions, Seattle Concierge Program, commercials, Attract China program (translate materials), signage, advertising, social media and online presence. Washington State Science & Engineering Fair Requested $45,000 Recommended Allocation $45,000 The Washington State Science and Engineering Fair (WSSEF) is a statewide competition for students held at Bremerton High School held in late spring. This event also includes a film festival. More than 3,500 people participate in or attend the fair and of those visitors, 94% qualify as tourists and 53% stay overnight. WSSEF is aggressive in its outreach efforts to numerous fairs throughout the state, as well as science based organizations, businesses, schools, and universities. In addition to printed materials, WSSEF has a website http://wssef.org� and does utilize social media. WSSEF also has televised "Inside Bremerton" segments on BKAT, and ads in newspapers, journals and magazines. Student project boards from the fair have been featured in the Norm Dicks Government Center lobby and at Seattle's Pacific Science Center. WSSEF collaborates with other educators during the Washington Home School Convention, Washington Science Teacher Association Conference, along with several events and symposiums to N expand the fair's message all over the state and beyond. There are also partnerships with Olympic College, Bremerton School District, and Parent Teacher Student Associations. Participants also receive a "goody bag" which has information on the Turner Joy, Naval Museum (Bremerton and Keyport), Parks and Recreation programs and events, and local restaurants among many other tourist stops. Attendees are going to be offered a special rate to stay overnight in Bremerton. Funding from the City of Bremerton will be used for marketing, development of multi -media materials, website updates, and development of new regional fairs. Visit Kitsap Peninsula Requested $48,000 Recommended Allocation $40,000 Visit Kitsap Peninsula provides services to Kitsap peninsula through its visitor center, website and printed marketing materials. Advertising may also be found in NW Travel magazine, Outdoor magazines, Inside Golf magazine, West Sound Home and Garden magazine, and brochures on board Washington State Ferries. Funding would be used to dedicate a webpage on www.visitkitsal2.com for Bremerton and for inclusion in the Visitor Guide, Bike Map, and Garden Guide. Tourism related businesses, attractions or events, some lodging, museums, art galleries, and microbreweries will be featured in brochures and the monthly newsletter. Bremerton Chamber of Commerce Requested $38,000 Recommended Allocation $32.000 Visitor Center & Armed Forces Festival The Bremerton Chamber of Commerce (BCC) is a member based organization which operates a visitor center in downtown and sponsors the annual Armed Forces Day Parade. The Parade draws between 25,000 and 40,000 visitors and about 7,500 visitors travel from out of the area. The visitor center assists up to 50 visitors over the phone and in person daily. To offset costs of operating the visitor center, the Chamber uses interns from Coffee Oasis. The Chamber provides printed directories at the visitor center, ferry terminal, and local businesses. Marketing involves the Kitsap Sun, Sound Publishing, KITZ radio, Visit Kitsap Peninsula, Certified Folder, Google Adwords, and the West Sound Home and Garden magazine. The Chamber has a mobile application "My Chamber App" and a website http://www.bremertonchamber.org/. Funding from the City of Bremerton will be used for marketing, website and mobile application, operation of the visitor center, and supplement efforts for the Armed Forces Festival. Bremerton Symphony Association Requested $25,000 Recommended Allocation $25.000 The Bremerton Symphony Association (BSA) offers events featuring the Symphony Orchestra, Youth Orchestra and Symphony Chorale. Events drew over 7,000 attendees and of those attendees, 133 travelled more than 50 miles (July 2016 to May 2017). The Symphony Orchestra currently collaborates with the Poulsbo Community Orchestra, Bainbridge Chorale, and Northwest Sinfonietta (Tacoma -Puyallup -Seattle). Additional partnerships with Kitsap Opera and the Navy Band will include performances next year. Future partnerships may include the Downtown Bremerton Association for a performance during the Rock the Dock Concert Series. Continued marketing through radio ads on KING -FM is anticipated to draw subscribers who would likely stay overnight. Events have been featured in the Kitsap Sun Art and Entertainment section, Kitsap Weekly, the Symphony's website at www.bremertonsymphony.org, on posters and flyers, and on social media. Funding from the City of Bremerton would be directed towards regional and statewide marketing to reach new subscribers. Kitsap County Historical Society Requested $24,000 Recommended Allocation $24,000 The Kitsap County Historical Society (KCHS) operates a museum and gift shop downtown and promotes education and culture through its museum exhibits, "Speaker Series", "Heritage Family Celebration", and "Eat Your Way Through Kitsap" Programs. The Historical Society is also part of the Armed Forces Festival, Military Appreciation Day, First Friday Artwalks, After -Hours, and the Kitsap Antique Show. The Museum had nearly 9,000 visitors last year with over 800 as tourists; and shared tourism information with 376 visitors last year. Partnerships included sharing rack card costs with The Valentinetti Puppet Museum; partnering with the Puget Sound Geneological Society for the Kitsap Antique Show; working with Olympic College on the Yama Project; sharing their space with Bremerton Symphony and Bremerton Lions to hold meetings at the museum; and participating in Downtown Bremerton Association hosted events like Art Walks, Safe Trick or Treat, and Winterfest. Marketing reaches to the Kitsap Sun, social media, BKAT, Blue Star Museums, Seattle Museum Month, Bremerton Chamber of Commerce, Visit Kitsap Peninsula, printed materials and on httn: //www.kitsaDhistorv.orL-/. Funding from the City of Bremerton would be used towards graphics design and printing of marketing materials, website and social media, advertising, support for museum operations and membership in the North American Reciprocal Museum Association (NARM). 4 Downtown Bremerton Association Requested $20,000 Recommended Allocation $20.000 Rock the Dock Concert Series The Downtown Bremerton Association hosts and promotes several events including St. Patrick's Day Parade, Rock the Dock Concert Series, Safe Trick or Treat, Ladies Night Out, and Winterfest. Partners include the Bremerton Chamber of Commerce, the Port of Bremerton, and Kitsap Credit Union. Its website www.downtownbremerton.orlinks to Facebook and Instagram. Advertising is also done through event posters and the Kitsap Sun. Funding would be used towards support of the Rock the Dock Concert Series in order to bring in quality performers, do more radio/tv advertising, and for rack cards for the Washington State Ferries. Downtown Bremerton Association Requested $20,000 Recommended Allocation $20.000 WayzGoose Kitsap The Downtown Bremerton Association is working towards bringing a new festival "WayzGoose Kitsap" to Bremerton which is anticipated to overlap with the Blackberry Festival in 2018. This will be a first of its kind event to be held on the west coast and will include a week long community festival and conference. This type of event is expected to bring 300 attendees for the conference and about 5,000 visitors for the festival. Partners include the Ladies of Letterpress, the Amalgamated Printers Association, and Green Drinks. Funding would be used towards promotion and outreach for the event. Kitsap Entrepreneurial Center Requested $12,000 Recommended Allocation $12.000 Kitsap Harbor Festival The Kitsap Entrepreneurial Center (KEC) supports marketing for the Kitsap Harbor Festival. The festival drew approximately 11,000 people and between 1,200 to 1,500 visitors stayed overnight during the Memorial Day weekend. KEC advertises via flyers and ads throughout Kitsap and Seattle area, on board Washington State Ferries, social media, website http://www.kitsapharborfestival.org, Go Boating and Sea magazines, and street banners. Numerous collaborations include the Fathoms of Fun Festival; Historic Ships Association; Visit Kitsap Peninsula; Washington State Ferries; various Chambers of Commerce and local business associations; Visit Kitsap Peninsula; and the Hampton Inn and Fairfield Inn. Funding from the City of Bremerton would go directly to marketing of Kitsap Harbor Festival, event planners, drawing entertainment, boosting advertising on social media and websites, and towards expansion of historic vessel events. Olympic College Foundation Requested $10,000 Recommended Allocation $10.000 Kitsap Wine Festival The Kitsap Wine Festival was previously coordinated by the Harrison Hospital Foundation. The merger with CHI Franciscan caused an end to the partnership for the event and the Olympic College Foundation will be coordinating the event in 2018. 589 people attended last year's festival with 2/3 coming from outside the area. The event is advertised through West Sound Home and Garden magazine and through Visit Kitsap Peninsula website, as well as on the event's website www.kitsapwinefestival.com. Partners include the Kitsap Conference Center and Columbia Hospitality. There are plans on developing a "Sip and Stay" overnight package with local hotels and restaurants, to feature the festival on Kitsap Sun's "Bremerton Beat", and to extend the advertising reach to Jefferson, Clallam, Pierce, and King Counties. Funding will be used towards marketing of the Kitsap Wine Festival. Valentinetti Puppet Museum Requested $7,000 Recommended Allocation $7.000 The Valentinetti Puppet Museum has a substantial collection of puppets from around the world, offers special shows intended for children and a monthly puppet making workshop. Over 3,000 people visit the museum each year. Shows have also been performed at Olympic College. Partnerships include Visit Kitsap Peninsula, Turner Joy, Bremerton Chamber of Commerce, and Downtown Business Association. The museum has been part of Ladies Night Out, Armed Forces Day and St Patrick's Day Parades, Back to School events, Safe Trick or Treat, Winterfest. Advertising is also found in Trip Advisor, Annual Kitsap County Guide, Macaroni Kids, and on social media. More information is available at www.ectandnunnets.orer. Funding from the City of Bremerton will be used towards marketing including a rack card. Kitsap Pride Network Requested $5,000 Recommended Allocation $5.000 Kitsap Pride Festival The Kitsap Pride Network hosts a series of events spanning two weekends in July which include a Film Fest held on Bainbridge Island followed by the Pride Party and Viva! Kitsap Pride held in Bremerton. Kitsap Pride typically draws 2,500 attendees with about 15% from outside of the area. Partners include the Downtown Bremerton Association, Hampton Inn, Visit Kitsap Peninsula, North Kitsap Tourism Coalition, Washington State Ferries, and other pride based organizations. In order to grow the event, the venue would likely be moved from Evergreen Rotary Park to downtown. More information on Kitsap Pride maybe found at http_//kitsappride.org and on social media. Funding will be used for marketing of the Kitsap Pride Festival. West Sound Art & Music Association Requested $5,000 Recommended Allocation $5.000 West Sound Ukelele Festival The West Sound Art and Music Association hosted its 1St West Sound Ukulele Festival in October 2016 300 visitors were reported and with marketing now in place, it is anticipated that between 500 to 700 attendees will be in town for the festival this year. Marketing will be targeted in the Seattle area through rack cards on Washington State Ferries, with options for day or multi -day trips posted on Facebook and at www.westsoundartandmusic.or. The WSAMA will be collaborating with the West Sound Arts Council, the Kitsap Conference Center and Admiral Theatre for festival events and workshops. Funding from the City of Bremerton would be used for marketing and for printing event programs and rack cards, as well as venue and festival expenses. Dominion Historical Workboat Association Requested $4,000 Recommended Allocation $4,000 The Dominion Historical Workboat Association promotes education and maintains historic vessels including the Dominion Tug LT -366 which is currently at the Bremerton Marina. During special events alone, over 200 visitors came to the Marina and 75 visitors toured the vessel. The DHWA partners with the Hampton and Fairfield Inns, Historic Ships Association, and participates in the Kitsap Harbor Festival and Trawler Fest. Links to hotels on its website at www.dominiontug.org and additional information at http: //museumships.us/tug/dominion as well as social media. Funding will be used to expand marketing the Dominion as part of the downtown destination for maritime history and to promote Bremerton community. Admiral Theatre Foundation Requested $150,000 Recommended Allocation $150.000 The Admiral Theatre is owned by the City of Bremerton and operated by the Admiral Theatre Foundation. The Foundation has an Operating Agreement for $90,000 per year through 2040. The addendum to the agreement has a provision for $150,000 which expires at the end of this year. Their request is to continue funding at this level for a 5 -year period through 2022. Should the City of Bremerton not extend the addendum, then the funding for the Foundation would revert to $90,000 per year starting in 2018. Year-long events have drawn over 53,000 patrons with over 13,000 from outside Kitsap County. The Admiral Theatre collaborates with the Downtown Bremerton Association, Chamber of Commerce, Bremerton Central Lions, Kiwanis Club, Bremerton Community Theatre, Jewel Box Theatre, Kitsap Forest Theater, Kitsap Bluejackets, Kitsap Pumas, and local restaurants. Marketing is through printed materials, radio, videos, and on social media. More information maybe found at www.admiraltheatre.ora/. Funding would be used for operation and maintenance of the theatre and tourism promotion. Kitsap Conference Center Requested $250,000 Recommended Allocation $250.000 The Kitsap Conference Center is owned by the City of Bremerton and operated by Columbia Hospitality. Year-long events bring in over 31,000 attendees with over 9,100 from outside of the area. More information is available at www.kitsal2conferencecenter.com/. Funding would be used for operation of the conference center for a 5 -year period through 2022. Kitsap Conference Center Requested $95,000 Recommended Allocation $95.000 Funding would be dedicated to a one-time debt payment for the conference center in 2018. Fund Reserve Recommended Allocation $20.000 Following discussion regarding the applicants' requests, the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee reached consensus that the remaining unallocated revenue be carried over in the Fund Reserve in 2018. LODGING TAX Frequently Asked Questions What is the Lodging Tax? RCW 67.28 The lodging tax, also referred to as the hotel -motel tax, is a consumer tax on lodging charges for periods of less than 30 consecutive days for hotels, motels, rooming houses, private campgrounds, RV parks, and similar facilities. How Can the Lodging Tax Revenues Be Used? The guiding principle for the use of lodging taxes is that they must be used for activities, operations and expenditures designed to increase tourism. Specifically, lodging taxes can be used for: • Tourism marketing; • Marketing and operations of special events and festivals designed to attract tourists; • Operations and capital expenditures of tourism -related facilities owned or operated by a municipality or a public facilities district; or • Operations of tourism -related facilities owned or operated by nonprofit organizations RCW 67.28.1816. Note that, as of July 1, 2013, capital expenditures for tourism -related facilities owned by nonprofit organizations are no longer permitted expenditures of lodging tax funds. What is Included in Tourism Marketing and Operations? It includes activities defined as "tourism promotion" in state law RCW 67.28.080. • Advertising, publicizing, or otherwise distributing information for the purpose of attracting and welcoming tourists; • Developing strategies to expand tourism; • Operating tourism promotion agencies; and • Funding the marketing or operation of special events and festivals designed to attract tourists. What is a "Tourism -Related Facility"? A tourism -related facility is a real or tangible personal property with a usable life of three or more years, or constructed with volunteer labor that is (a) owned by a public entity, nonprofit organization (including a non-profit business organization, destination marketing organization, main street organization, lodging association, or chamber of commerce) and (b) used to support tourism, performing arts, or to accommodate tourist activities RCW 67.28.080. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) BMC 2.38 This committee must have at least five members, appointed by the governing body. The committee membership must include at least two representatives of businesses that are required to collect the lodging tax, at least two people who are involved in activities that are authorized to be funded by this tax, and one elected city official who serves as chairperson of the committee. The statute also provides that a person who is eligible under the first category is not eligible for appointment under the second category, and vice versa. • Organizations representing hotels and motels and organizations involved in activities that can be funded by this tax may recommend people for membership. • The number of committee members from organizations representing the hotels and motels and the number from organizations involved in activities that can be funded must be equal. • A city's committee may include a non-voting elected official and vice -versa. • The governing body must review the membership of the committee annually. Applications for Lodging Tax Funds In counties or cities of at least 5,000 population, applications must be submitted directly to the lodging tax advisory committee (LTAC). In counties or cities of less than 5,000, applications are submitted to the county or city. The law is silent on how often the awards should be made. Some jurisdictions choose to make awards as part of their annual budget cycle. Others also make mid -year awards to account for unexpected increases or decreases in projected revenue. Who Must Apply? • Convention and visitors bureaus; • Destination marketing organizations; • Nonprofits, including main street organizations, lodging associations, or chambers of commerce; • Municipalities — The State Auditor's Office is interpreting the law to mean that all users of funds, including municipalities, are considered applicants and must follow relevant application procedures. So, cities and counties should submit applications for their own projects to the LTAC. What is Included in the Application? All applications must include estimates of how funding the activity will result in increases to people staying overnight, travelling 50 miles or more, or coming from another state or country. To ensure this data is collected, jurisdictions should require this information on their lodging tax application forms. There is no requirement that priority for funding be given to applicants expected to generate the most travelers, and lodging tax revenue may still be awarded to recipients who generate few of these types of travelers. Review and Selection of Applications In a municipality of at least 5,000 population, the LTAC receives all applications for lodging tax revenue and recommends a list of candidates and funding levels to the municipality's legislative body for final determination. If a municipality under 5,000 chooses to establish a LTAC, they may, but do not have to, follow these requirements. What Does the Municipality Do with the LTAC's Recommendations? The legislative body "may only choose recipients from the list of candidates and recommended amounts provided by the local lodging tax advisory committee." However, a city or county does not have to fund the full list as recommended by the LTAC and can choose to make awards in the recommended amounts to all, some, or none of the candidates on this list. The selected recipients must be awarded the amounts recommended by the LTAC. Can the city council award more money to an applicant than the LTAC recommends? No, a city council cannot award more funding to an applicant than the lodging tax advisory committee recommends. The relevant statute, RCW 67.28.1816(1)(b)(ii), reads as follows: The local lodging tax advisory committee must select the candidates from amongst the applicants applying for use of revenues in this chapter and provide a list of such candidates and recommended amounts of funding to the municipality for final determination. The municipality may choose only recipients from the list of candidates and recommended amounts provided by the local lodging tax advisory committee. Therefore, if a city chooses to award funding to a particular recipient, then it is limited to the amount of funding recommended by the LTAC. Contracts with Recipients of Lodging Tax Funds Because of the state constitutional gift of public funds prohibition, a city or county should enter into a contract with any private organization providing marketing services, operating special events or festivals, or any other tourist promotion activity. The contract should spell out the tourism -related services to be provided in exchange for city or county funding and what reports will be required. Also, any organization doing promotion on behalf of the city or county may only spend lodging tax funds on items that the city or county itself could fund. This prohibits, for example, any expenditures on promotional hosting. Reporting Requirements => Started in 2014 & Report Available at www. leg.wa.gov/ • All entities receiving lodging tax funds must provide information to their respective local • government on their use of these funds as required by RCW 67.28.1816. This includes local governments that directly use lodging tax funds for municipal purposes, such as municipal facilities or community events. Local governments will then, in turn, report this information annually to the Joint Legislative & Audit Review Committee (JLARC) using their on-line reporting system. • Local governments should, as part of their contract with recipients, require that the report be provided immediately after the event or activity. • The deadline for local governments to submit the annual data to JLARC is March 15 for the year ending the previous December 31. • JLARC does not provide advice on how to estimate tourism impacts. Good faith estimates of actuals can be reported provided applicants and users of funds indicate how those estimates will be developed. All information (including descriptions of how actual impacts were estimated) will be available for public review. • JLARC can be contacted for technical issues associated with the reporting portal by emailing jlarc@leg.wa.gov %MRSC Material from www.mrsc.org & "Ask MRSC" Special Issue Newsletter dated July 13, 2016... M R S C Local Government Success; Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAQ • This committee must have at least fine members, appointed by the governing body. • The committee membership must include at least two representatives of businesses that are required to collect the lodging tax, at least two people who are involved in activities that are authorized to be funded by this tax, and one elected city official who serves as chairperson of the committee- The statute also provides that a person who is eligible under the first category is not eligible for appointment under the second category, and vice versa- • Organizations representing hotels and motels and organizations involved in activities that can be funded by this tax may recommend people for membership - The number of committee members from organizations representing the hotels and motels and the number froim organizations involved in activities that can be funded must be equal. • A city's committee may include a non-voting elected county official and vice -versa- • The governing body must review the membership of the committee annually - In addition to reviewing applications for the use of the lodging tax, what does the committee do? Any proposal to impose a new lodging tax, raise the rate of an existing tax, repeal an exemption from the lodging tax, or change the use of the tax proceeds, must be submitted to the lodging tax advisory committee for review and comment- • This submission must occur at least 45 days before final action will betaken on the governing body's proposal- Even if the committee finishes its work before the 45 days are up, the governing body still must wait 45 days. • The committee's comments must include an analysis of the extent to which the proposal will accommodate activities for tourists or increase tourism, and of the extent to which it will affect the long -run stability of the fund to which the hotel -motel taxes are credited. • If the advisory committee does not submit comments before the time that f inal action is to be taken on the proposal, the governing may go ahead and take final action. a Y N O O N pCp O u h v o o .o a _ a a E o c v w s O E m " E N v m E — Vm Y om m o a 0 O 10 0 o m o m o 0 o m o 0 0 0 a.-i o ry ry m ti a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m o o m o i o 0 0 0 0 0 i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' o0 0 m o 0o vi i o 0 0 0 0 0 i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' oo vi vi vi ry i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .ti m ti ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 i o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' vi ri vi oo vi o ry � ti ry ry 00 00 0 0 o� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o m m vi m a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ry o 0 vi ry vi vi vi o0 m V N E V O U N N od E gI uv v° E V , a —' 2 v v a v > o. Y Q _ V u v� o N 1E > �y _ O - N — — , — 9u—o- voi m l7 ? v Y > E O E �w Op. p v— Q N V V o a v N> 9 N a a v o o o v o N v a v c v— r ` E r�o E Y E a c o 9 v c u � m 2 - 0 0 0 0 9 p m rpp E o C ry o 0 UI v u Ic i? a > u ow u °' .Q. m o oo 0 0 a y a Y c L 0 0 $ O a W w w u a Y G Y H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m � m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 o � o m a m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o vi m o � 0 0 0 0 o m m o � 0 0 0 0 ry o vi m m m o0 0 0 0 r m o 0 0 o 0 0 00 o vi m a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o vi vi m � a m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o vi o a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o vi vi m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 vi o vi vi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 vi o vi � m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � o vi vi m m o ti a 0 0 0 0 0 0 o vi vi m m � a 0 0 0 0 0 o vi of a c o 9 v c u � m 2 - `o E N m Y 9 p m rpp E o C v V 2 O — p. � O w d` o a UI v u Ic i? a > u ow u °' .Q. m o oo U UI o @ a y a Y c L — E $ O a W w w u a Y G Y H O 2 2 ADMIRAL T HEATRE Received I o �/�rton City Council Affloe EST. 1942 City Council City of Bremerton DCD/Block Grant 345 — 6th Street #600 Bremerton, WA 98337 Dear Bremerton City Council, We are pleased that the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee has recommended a $150,000 award to the Admiral Theatre for the coming year. We thank you in advance for this award. We would like the city council address and amend our lease agreement with the city to have this $150,000 - annual award extended permanently. We believe the Admiral Theatre has demonstrated a strong commitment to the goals of the city and been proven a key player in the economic development of the downtown area. We are quite proud of our efforts and feel our accomplishment merit the $150,000 investment by the city from its lodging tax funds on an annual basis. And we are investing in the theatre as well. As you know, we maintain complete responsibility for all operational costs associated with running the theatre. But in addition to the excellent management of operational costs we have chosen this year to invest $1.2 -million in capital investments needed to sustain the theatre into its next 20 years. The city's $150,000 annual investment returns so much in tax dollars, overnight guests, downtown vibrancy, and retail stimualtion because of our presence. New investments by developers and businesses are building on the foundation we have helped establish downtown. This has been a great partnership between the city and the Admiral Theatre that we want to continue to provide economic dividends for us both. Here are some recent statistics to help reinforce our request: • Admiral Theatre invests $1.2 -million in the city -owned theatre in 2017 • Admiral Theatre brings 53,913 patrons to the theatre in 2015-2016 fiscal year • The theatre attracted 13,130 patrons from outside Kitsap County during our 2016-2017 season • Admiral Theatre economic impact created 73 fulltime jobs, $79,300 in local government revenues, $96,089 in state government revenues • School Day performances provide arts education to area schools • Summer camp program provides arts training for 80 students each year We appreciate your consideration in this matter and look forward to our continuing partnership with the city. Brian Johnson, Executive Director ADMIRALTHEATRE.ORG ADMIN OFFICE 360.373.6810 1 BOX OFFICE 360.373.6743 1 FAX 360.405.0673 515 PACIFIC AVENUE, BREMERTON, WASHINGTON 98337 From: Christine Grenier on behalf of City Council Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 3:10 PM To. Leslie Daugs Cc: Eric Younger Subject: FW: Questions re: Visit Kitsap's Website Attn: Council Member Leslie Daugs (FYI) From: PGH-VKP [mailto: rafhoke visitkitsa .com] Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 2.:54 PM To: City Council Cc: Eric Younger Subject: Re: Questions re: Visit Kitsap's Website Hello, Christine: A couple members of the VKP Executive Board reviewed the Council's request that I contact Council member Daugs directly. Their concern is that it represents a significant departure from established and published lodging tax funding guidelines. Since this request is outside of the normal Lodging tax approval process, the VKP respectfully requests that new questions or concerns expressed by Council members be provided in writing and submitted to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee and then forwarded to the applicant. This will ensure that there is a public record of question's and comments made by Council members and the response provided by the applicant. The VKP is a little surprised by the inquiry since it does not have any record of receiving any comments, questiolls, suggestions or concerns in writing from Bremerton stakeholders, Council members, or City staff regarding the VKP website or Bremerton's dedicated page. We are also happy to address any concern when presented. I am out of the office tomorrow but please forward the questions and we will make every effort to get a response back to the Counci 1 as soon as possible. Best, Patty Patricia Gtaf-Hoke Director, Visit Kitsap Peninsula. 360-908-0088 - grafhoke0visitkitsap,com www,Visi(Kit5a .com From: PGH-VKP ,�grafhoke@visitkitsap.com> Sent: Monday, July 17, 2017 12:18 PM To: City Council Subject: Re: Questions re: Visit Kitsap's Website Sure. I'm might suggest we meet so I can rev in person. Best, Patty Patricia Graf -Hoke Director, Visit Kitsap Peninsula 360-908-0088 - grafhokeavisitKitsa .com www.VisitKi%ap.cont Visit Kusa I. Peninsula the Natural Side of Puget Saari visitkitsap.com On Jul 17, 2017, at 12:08 PM, City Council cCity.Council(cijci.bremerton.wa.us> wrote: Hi, Patty. I wanted to let you know that most of the discussion on the LTAC's recommendations during the July 12 Council Study Session was centered around Visit Kitsap's website. The main issues seemed to be navigation within the site and how Bremerton was represented overall. It is recommended that you contact Council Member Leslie Daugs to answer her questions and address her concerns prior to the July 19 Councif Meeting, when the Council takes action on the LTAC`S recommendations, and she may be contacted at (360) 440-1961. Sincerely, fflmm* Christine Crenier Council/Auditor Assistant Bremerton City Council (360) 473-5280 City.CouncilC&ci.bremerton wa us www.BremertonWA.gov Cimage001.g if><image002.gif3 <image003.png> 4; Im' �A ?1 4 4; Im' tj s 1w LIU &-9 m3! _ �e, ��,��,�. ,• ti n � �� `� �. . •. � � - a ,� � � � � � �— _ m 4 4L 13 �;: w ,, �' � r � �'' �+ 't'r. " � �' ,.'��.'� �i' .. � k Vii. low - 1w ILA I cc Cf) W— w uj cc cc UJ LU I-,mmw mom �I i 1 .. t i 'b it � p 4 ase --•i Y•.xl n t .. r. 1 j C. 4 0 0 w c 4-1 u .ro CL V 0 >, C on E i Lu 401-9 Ln LU I..L CL c� a► N N La = p co E=2 CO)0 s a N�NQ� `out' w M Cc c +E � s 3 0 _ WaL s,tl G) a Y � 3 3 d V O �° �¢ �acn0z +,F4 Lu N �[ O0 N C;) a� V o 0 D a w p a .� m (1) 3 ao ' s N �; N C3 O O-76 3 `� I �� e. �. �� a� � ,�� a �� *ZW ell 1 4, "N I FIN I E . . ............... ........ m®r v a loft�� . : � LU tie 9= C CL Z 0 a_ Q V Q O a m N � a Q O Z 0 p� W W f C / c w W iC co Z � � O OZ in00) in =� m N 1 y CC W 0 CC1 C2 cq J W S v 00 0 m C) ` o - W { O R N Z 0 0 z O o wa w io �w a �m LU W Z d W x r*4 U O U »> > » > »> > > > > T LL LL LL LL LL ~ LL LL LL ~ ~ ~ h m o w •� O O v00 G U U0 m Zu Y N 0 Irl E N W h m GO oo CJ1m O O N m N N O N O m O m O m O m O t< Q -V! N rr)Orr)OO �7O N Ln O O O v p C� , J Q rIj -q rq r1i r1i m m m a LL p ON �..� �--I �--I �--I c -I 00 T O J� N ti N N p N N E LL ON rl N r -I N a p c v LL O +- �® a co rq - O O i O Om - = v 11 ++ tA ii � o IA m N i N i i VI N Ol Q1 (5) Zm bfbii lu 7 3 —3 7 m 3 3 O �-f o N o N o 0 0 M` U MN p 1 ; N NN N a CX30 ri o N �p c0 N Ln `i N a v ate_ w ca' c; o `'' r' �f�w ��m ��a' N < L G. O C 7 Y Q T -^ C-0 o ++ O E o y o m m 0 a 3> m +� -0 a Vl i x° z z O cn O� ; 0O z EC)l "a 'O r, O �o Ln Ln -1 O O O O O Li B0 O N O Ln O O Q N co to N m O c Ln O r I 01 It N +' m m ci r- c rl 1p O Co N m N Ln O O Z # W U L O v N m pT W Z m C6 cu S cc T C j. O A vi �l y ) m 41cuQ W w N C� w o -- - v a 3 t v °° w � t +, t+� c +f0 o� 3 > Q v ,� o 7= c 0 o o M o m ,� 3 0 v v w J>- zm u`z 0 < 5 "No