HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/25/2023 STUDY SESSION AGENDA PACKET______________________________________________________________
CITY COUNCIL 345 6th Street, Suite 100, Bremerton, WA 98337 Phone (360) 473-5280
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2023
CITY COUNCIL HYBRID STUDY SESSION AGENDA
Starting at 5:00 PM in Council Conference Room 603
Council Conference Room 603 will be open to the public to attend the Study Session in-person, but there
will be no opportunities for input. However, public questions or comments may be submitted at any time
to City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us. Please remember that the content of the Agenda Bill items is
subject to change; and no action at the Study Session is anticipated. If approved by the Council, these
items will be placed on the November 1, 2023 City Council Meeting Agenda, or as indicated…
Members of the public may click the link below to join the webinar:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87318266756?pwd=ZWlMVnVYbFBHYjY5U1RJUmFreDFXUT09
Or One tap mobile:
US: +12532050468,,87318266756#,,,,*857582# or +12532158782,,87318266756#,,,,*857582#
Or Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1
253 205 0468 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 669 444 9171 or +1 669 900
6833
Webinar ID: 873 1826 6756
Passcode: 857582
A. BRIEFINGS ON AGENDA BILL ITEMS & UPDATES
1. Confirm Appointment of Kristen Sluiter to the Bremerton Parks & Recreation Commission
2. Supplemental Agreement No. 1 with DKS Associates, Inc. for Pedestrian Crossing Safety
Project
3. Goods & Services Agreement for Purchase of a Cummins Emergency Generator for
Lift Station CE-1
4. Resolution No. 3367 to approve the Extension of Wastewater Utility Services to the Fisher
Plat located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area
5. Change Order No. 2 to the Public Works Agreement with Utter Associates, Inc for Design
and Installation of Audio-Visual Equipment at the Bremerton Municipal Court
6. Update on Oyster Bay Avenue Site Preparation & Homeless Shelter
Development Information only
7. Proposed Public Hearing on Resolution to approve Community Development Block
Grant/HOME Funding Recommendations for inclusion in the 2024 CDBG/HOME Action Plan
8. Proposed Public Hearing on Revenue Sources for the 2024 City of Bremerton Budget
9. Ordinance to amend and re-establish City Rates and Fees for 2024
10. Ordinance to amend and re-establish Utility Assessments, Rates, and Fees, and Charges for
2024
11. Ordinance to levy Property Taxes for Collection in 2024
B. DIVERSITY, EQUITY & INCLUSION PROJECT UPDATE & DISCUSSION
o Will be facilitated by MFR Coaching & Consulting and Clarity Partnerships
Continued on next page…
Americans with Disabilities Act accommodations provided upon request. Those requiring special
accommodations should contact the City Clerk’s Office at (360) 473 -5323 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.
C. GENERAL COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. Discussion on Charter Section 18 relating to the City Auditor Information only
2. Discussion on possible definitions for Livability relating to the Joint Transportation
Compatibility Plan Information only
3. Discussion on Social Media Guidelines for Elected Officials Information only
4. Discussion on City Communications Position Information only
5. Audit Committee Briefing (Last Meeting 10/16/23) – Chair Anna Mockler
6. Public Works Committee Briefing (Last Meeting 10/17/2023) – Chair Anna Mockler
7. Regional and Other Committee/Board Briefings
8. Other General Council Business (As necessary, and as time allows…)
D. ADJOURNMENT OF STUDY SESSION
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Confirm Appointment of Kristen Sluiter to the
Bremerton Parks & Recreation Commission
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: Executive
Presenter: Mayor Wheeler
Phone: (360) 473-5266
SUMMARY:
The Mayor is seeking confirmation for the appointment of Kristen Sluiter to the Bremerton Parks &
Recreation Commission. The term expires September 29, 2026.
ATTACHMENTS: Application to the commission is available in the Mayor’s office.
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ Limited Presentation ☐ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to confirm the appointment of Kristen Sluiter to the Bremerton Parks & Recreation Commission
for the term expiring September 29, 2026.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 11/09/2021
A1
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Supplemental Agreement No. 1 with DKS
Associates, Inc. for Pedestrian Crossing
Safety Project
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: PW&U-Engineering
Presenter: Chris Dimmitt
Phone: (360) 473-2307
SUMMARY:
In November 2022, the City executed a contract with DKS for the design of the Pedestrian Crossing
Safety Project in the amount of $220,049.25. The proposed Supplement No. 1 increases the contract
value by $66,493.87 to a new total of $286,543.12; the work includes additional design work and
Right-Of-Way (ROW) services. The supplement is a WSDOT standard agreement with its standard
terms and conditions.
ATTACHMENTS:
1) Supplement No. 1 with DKS Associates, Inc.
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): This project is fully funded by a Highway Safety
Improvement Program (HSIP) Grant.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ Limited Presentation ☐ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve Supplement No.1 between the City of Bremerton and DKS Associates, Inc for the
Pedestrian Crossing Safety Project; and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement
with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 11/09/2021
A2
Supplemental Agreement
Number
Organization and Address
Phone:
Original Agreement Number
Project Number Execution Date Completion Date
Project Title New Maximum Amount Payable
Description of Work
The Local Agency of
desires to supplement the agreement entered in to with
and executed on and identified as Agreement No.
All provisions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement.
The changes to the agreement are described as follows:
I
Section 1, SCOPE OF WORK, is hereby changed to read:
II
Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, is amended to change the number of calendar days
for completion of the work to read:
III
Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended as follows:
as set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and by this reference made a part of this supplement.
If you concur with this supplement and agree to the changes as stated above, please sign in the Appropriate
spaces below and return to this office for final action.
By: By:
Consultant Signature Approving Authority Signature
Date
DOT Form 140-063
Revised 09/2005
01 DKS Associates
719 2nd Ave, Suite 1250
Seattle, WA 98104
206-328-9800
315042
HSIP-000S(629)11/02/2022 12/31/2024
Systemic Pedestrian Treatments - Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons $ 286,543.12
The project will install Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) systems at eight locations throughout
the city of Bremerton. The project will include thermoplastic marked crosswalks and ADA curb ramps
associated with the RRFB enhanced marked crosswalks.
City of Bremerton
DKS Associates
11/02/2022 315042
See Exhibit A attached
No changes
See Exhibit D attached.
Richard Hutchinson, DKS Associates Greg Wheeler, Mayor City of Bremerton
Exhibit “A”
Summary of Payments
Basic
Agreement
Supplement #1 Total
Direct Salary Cost
Overhead
(Including Payroll Additives)
Direct Non-Salary Costs
Fixed Fee
Total
DOT Form 140-063
Revised 09/2005
47,576.53 6,202.45 53,778.98
86,527.44 11,280.40 97,807.84
72,623.86 47,274.34 119,898.20
13,321.42 1,736.69 15,058.11
220,049.25 66,493.87 286,543.12
Page 1 of 5
Systemic Pedestrian Treatments- RRFB
Bremerton, WA DKS Associates
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
City of Bremerton - Systemic Pedestrian Treatments- RRFB
Bremerton, WA
Supplement #1
November 1, 2023
Project Description
The City of Bremerton (CITY) requested the DKS team (CONSULTANT) re-design the curb ramps at the
southeast and southwest corner of the Perry Ave and Stone Way intersection to fit with the Kitsap
County sidewalk improvement design north of the intersection crossing the city limits.
During the design, it was identified that the project needs right-of-way acquisitions for one (1) parcel
and eight (8) Temporary Construction Easements (TCE). The original scope of work assumes two (2) TCEs
in support of the City’s project objectives.
All other assumptions from the base contract are still in effect with the exception of tasks and
deliverables delineated in this supplement.
Task 1: Project Management
The CONSULTANT will perform project management and administration tasks for the sub-consultants
contract and additional scope of work.
The CONSULTANT will work with the CITY to coordinate with the County’s design north of the Perry Ave
and Stone Way intersection.
Task 5: 90% Design
The CONSULTANT will revise the 90% PS&E packages for the curb ramp re-design at Perry Ave and Stone
Way. Both southeast and southwest corners will be revised to two curb ramp designs from the current
combined signal ramp design. The CONSULTANT will also add the crosswalk pavement markings on the
east and west leg of the intersection connecting to the County designed curb ramp on the north side of
Stone Way.
Page 2 of 5
Systemic Pedestrian Treatments- RRFB
Bremerton, WA DKS Associates
Fee covers redesign of 4 curb ramps at Stone Way and Perry Ave. All other deliverables are unchanged
from base contract.
Task 5 Deliverables:
The curb ramps redesign will be part of the 90% PS&E package. No separated design
deliverables.
Task 6: 100% Design and Bid Documents
The CONSULTANT will incorporate the four curb ramp design at Stone Way and Perry Ave. Both
southeast and southwest corners are changed to two curb ramp designs. The crosswalk pavement
markings are added on the east and west leg of the intersection connecting to the County designed curb
ramp on the north side of Stone Way.
Fee covers redesign of 4 curb ramps at Stone Way and Perry Ave. All other deliverables are unchanged
from base contract.
Task 5 Deliverables:
The curb ramps and pavement marking design will be part of the 100% design and final bid
documents. No separated design deliverables.
Task 8: Right-of-Way Services
ROW Plans
The original contract set aside a $5,500 fee for ROW confirmation, plans, and obtaining title reports
assuming (2) temporary construction easements. As the design is being finalized, the project identified
one parcel that need exhibits, maps and legal descriptions; and eight Temporary Construction
Easements (TCE) will be required for construction.
The CITY authorizes the CONSULTANT to use the $5,500 set-aside budget for ROW plans. This task
revision includes additional budget to cover 6 additional TCEs and one acquisition.
ROW Services
• The right-of-way needs for 30% plans have been developed. The ROW services scope is
amended based on (6) additional temporary construction easements and one fee takes – a total
of six additional parcels in support of the CITY's project objectives
Page 3 of 5
Systemic Pedestrian Treatments- RRFB
Bremerton, WA DKS Associates
• Regarding the six (6) additional parcels requiring fee takes and temporary construction
easements, it is assumed they are non-complex in nature, will amount to less than $25,000
each, and therefore valuations can be provided via Administrative Offer Summary (AOS) reports.
It is understood that federal funding will be a component of the program and therefore that
WSDOT Right-of-Way Certification will be required
Project Management
• Attend kick-off meeting with the CITY to obtain further project background and discuss design
impacts and communications approaches for each property/business owner and tour each
project site.
• Lead regular acquisition status meetings, provide verbal and written status reporting, a total of
two 30-minutes status meetings and 6 monthly reports for the acquisition of ROW from six
additional parcels.
• Coordinate with design team, project team, city's public outreach teams in settlement and
mitigation strategies for an additional six parcels.
• Provide oversight into State and Federal compliance issues and requirements for six additional
parcels.
Valuation Services
• Complete Administrative Offer Summaries (AOS's) for six additional parcels - resulting with a
total of eight AOS reports based on WSDOT and Uniform Relocation Act requirements.
• Perform market data research, improvements valuations, for (6) additional acquisitions.
• Integrate valuation findings into final valuation determinations and offer packages for CITY
review/approval for six additional parcels.
• Title Review and Offer Package Preparations for six additional parcels.
• Review preliminary title reports, confirm vesting interest of each parcel affected for six
additional parcels.
• Prepare acquisition files according to WSDOT, CITY and Uniform Relocation Act standards for six
additional parcels.
• Prepare offer packages, conveyance documents, notices and all other documentation associated
with the negotiations process. If acquisitions require the need for fee takes and permanent
easements from additional parcels, an additional budget will be negotiated before commencing
work
Negotiations/Settlement Justifications
Page 4 of 5
Systemic Pedestrian Treatments- RRFB
Bremerton, WA DKS Associates
• Contact property owners, impacted by CITY's acquisition, present offer packages for six
additional parcels.
• Negotiate and settlement terms for TCE and/or permits, perform property research,
counteroffer justifications and other data to reach settlement for six additional parcels.
• Conduct a minimum of three (3) significant and meaningful contacts with each property owner
before recommendation of impasse in negotiations for six additional parcels.
• If it becomes apparent that negotiations have reached an impasse and sufficient time has
passed for the property owner to make a settlement decision, the CONSULTANT shall provide
written notice to the CITY of impasse in negotiations and recommendation for condemnation
• If the CITY choses to continue negotiations as opposed to filing condemnation, an additional
budget to extend negotiation efforts will be negotiated.
• Prepare Administrative Justification Settlement Memorandums, per CITY, WSDOT and Uniform
Act requirements for one parcel – resulting in no changes to scope our hours.
• Facilitate execution of all conveyance documents, prepare CITY payment vouchers and
coordinate with CITY on owner settlement payments for six additional parcels.
WSDOT Certification Oversight/Project Close Out
• Prepare all acquisition files for WSDOT Local Area Coordinator (LAC) Review for six additional
parcels.
• Coordinate with WSDOT LAC on certification issues and concerns that arise, as needed
• Provide CITY with final, closed out, acquisition files, both digital and hard copies for six
additional parcels.
Assumptions
• All negotiations shall continue to follow the CITY's approved ROW procedures. This includes
negotiations being conducted by a WSDOT certified real estate agent and diaries kept for all
interactions with property owners
• Any title clearance to be performed by CITY
• Right-of-way plans and right of way legal descriptions to be provided by CONSU LTANT's team
• CITY will facilitate payment of claims to affected property owners.
• Consultant will order and pay for six additional (6) Preliminary Title Reports (PTR's) necessary to
confirm all affected ownerships. Cost of PTR's is included in this Scope and Fee Proposal. Any
title clearance action is not included in this scope of work
• All valuations are assumed to less than $25,000. If above, scope and fee proposal is subject to
revision to account for appraisal and appraisal review costs, per Uniform Act Requirements. An
additional budget to include appraisal fees will be negotiated prior to commencing work
Page 5 of 5
Systemic Pedestrian Treatments- RRFB
Bremerton, WA DKS Associates
• Scope and Fee Proposal in Amendment 1 is based on design assumptions based on the 30% plan
submittal.
Task 8 Deliverables:
• Draft ROW plans - in conjunction with the 30% milestone
• Final ROW plans - in conjunction with 100% PS&E milestone
• Developing project funding estimate (PFE) for WSDOT approval
• Obtaining ROW certification from WSDOT for the project
• Permitting, licensing, recording fees or closing costs are not included.
EXHIBIT DHOUR AND FEE ESTIMATE
Project:
10-Oct-23
DKS Associates
Total Fee
Principal Project Senior Project Assistant CAD Project Effective
Task Engineer Manager Engineer Engineer Engineer Technician Coordinator Admin Direct Overhead Profit multiplier
101.65$ 76.89$ 59.66$ 51.25$ 47.21$ 36.63$ 39.15$ 40.43$ Hours Labor Cost 181.87% 28%3.0987
Task 1 - Project Management
1.1 General Project Management 0 8 0 0 0 0 3 0 11 732.57 1,332.33 205.12 2,270.01
1.2 QA/QC 0 4 8 0 0 0 0 0 12 784.84 1,427.39 219.76 2,431.98
1.3 Coordination and Meetings (1)0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 426.88 776.37 119.53 1,322.77
0 16 10 0 0 0 3 0 29 1,944.29 3,536.08 544.40 6,024.77
Task 5: 90% Design
5.1 90% Design Plans 3 8 8 20 18 57 2,721.49 4,949.57 762.02 8,433.08
5.2 90% Specifications 0 0 0 0 0 - - - -
5.3 90% Construction Cost Estimate 0 1 2 3 154.08 280.23 43.14 477.45
5.4 Draft MEF Document 0 0 - - - -
0 3 9 8 22 18 0 0 60 2,875.57$ 5,229.80$ 805.16$ 8,910.53$
Task 6: 100% Design and Bid Documents
6.1 100% Design Plans 1 3 2 12 6 24 1,144.67 2,081.81 320.51 3,546.99
6.2 100% Specifications 0 0 0 0 0 - - - -
6.3 100% Construction Cost Estimate 0 0 1 0 1 47.21 85.86 13.22 146.29
6.4 Final MEF Document 0 0 0 0 - - - -
6.5 Bid Ready Package 1 2 1 4 190.71 346.84 53.40 590.95
0 1 4 2 15 7 0 0 29 1,382.59$ 2,514.52$ 387.13$ 4,284.23$
Task 8 - Right-of-Way Services
8.1 ROW Plans (KPG)
8.2 ROW Services (Abeyta)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -$ -$ -$ -$
SUM 0 20 23 10 37 25 3 0 118 6,202.45$ 11,280.40$ 1,736.69$ 19,219.53$
Sub Consultants:
KPG PSOMAS: Task 8.1 - ROW Plans 3,943.37$
Abeyta: Task 8.2 - ROW services 43,330.97$
ODC:
Milage/Print
Grand Total 66,493.87$
City of Bremerton Systemic Pedestrian Treatments RRFB
Supplement #1
Labor Hour Estimate
Task Totals
Description
Task Total
Task Total
Task Total
City of Bremerton Page 1 of 1 DKS
10/10/2023
KPG PSOMAS
COST COMPUTATIONS
Client: DKS
Project: Bremerton Systemic Pedestrian Treatments RRFB
Supplemental Budget for Right of Way Plans and Legal Descriptions
DATE: October 2023
Survey ManagerSurvey Crew II (W/Equip)Survey Crew I (W/Equip)Project SurveyorSenior Survey Technician$82.73 $82.00 $64.50 $54.06 $45.12 Hours Fee
12.1 ROW Rearch 0 -$
12.2 ROW Plans Preparation 24 24 1,082.88$
12.3 Legal Descrriptions and Exhibits 5 5 225.60$
0 0 0 0 29 29 1,308.48$
0 0 0 0 29 29 1,308.48$
ICR Overhead @ 1.7337% = 2,268.51$
Fixed Fee @ 28% = 366.37$
Total KPG (DL + OH + Fixed Fee) = 3,943.37$
N/A
-$
Mileage at current IRS rate -$
Reproduction Allowance -$
-$
3,943.37$
Note: this budget is a supplement to the $5,500 originally allocated for ROW plans and Legal Description Preparation
Task
No.Task Description
Labor Hour Estimate
Total Hours and Labor Fee
Estimate by Task
Task 12 Right-of-Way Plans
Task Total
Done under previous task
Total Estimated Budget
Total Labor Hours and Fee
Subconsultants
Total Subconsultant Expense
Reimbursable Direct Non-Salary Costs
Total Reimbursable Expense
Prepared for: DKS Supplement 1
City of Bremerton - Systemic Pedestrian Treatments- RRFB
NEGOTIATION SERVICES
$61.53 $50.32 SR
Item 1: Project Administration Prop Mgt Admin SR/PM Agent Acq Agent Acq Agent Title REO Escrow Total
Coord with City and DKS (three additional hours).3 0 3
Certification Assistance / Coordination with City and WSDOT - four additional
hours 4 0 4
Clerical - 0 0 0
Contract Admin and Management of overall ROW activities (5 additional hours)5 0 5
Administrative Offer Summary Reports (8) Parcels (60 additional hours)24 32 56
Progress Reporting, Meetings & Kick-off Meetings - (5 additional hours)5 0 5
Prepare one ROW Funding Estimate - [8 Parcels: 1 fee take and 7 TCE(s)] = 12
additional hours 12 0 12
Coord w/Subconsultants- 0 0 0
Hours:0 0 53 32 0 0 0 0 85
Direct Labor $:0.00 0.00 3,261.09 1,610.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4,871.33$
Item 2: Right-of-Way Acquisition
Title, Plans, and Appr. Review - six additional parcels = 44 additional hours 22 22 44
Pre-Offer/File Setup/Document Prep - 8 packages/files for (7) parcels with
TCE(s) & 1 parcel with a Fee Take = 52 additional hours 25 25 50
Negotiations (TCEs from seven tax parcels and fee take from one parcel) = 108
additional hours.53 55 108
Administrative Settlement Memorandums (1 Parcel) No additional hours.0
Clearing Title - City assumes the risk and/or is responsible for clearing title.0 0 0
Condemn Support - 0 0 0
Data/file & Diary Management, Maintenance for City & WSDOT = six additional
parcesl = 28 additional hours. 14 14 28
Hours:0 0 114 116 0 0 0 0 230
Direct Labor $:0.00 7,014.42 5,837.12 12,851.54$
Direct Labor Totals:
Hours:0 0 167 148 0 0 0 0 315
Dollars:0 0.00 10,275.51 7,447.36 0 0 0 0 17,722.87$
Direct Salary Cost:17,722.87$
Per Parcel Breakdown:Direct Labor Rate:17,722.87$
Summary Audited Overhead Rate:110%19,495.16$
Direct Salary Cost 17,722.87$ Profit:26%4,607.95$
Overhead Cost @ 110.00%19,495.16$ Composite Multiplier:136%41,825.97$
Fee @ 26%4,607.95$ *Total Labor Fee:41,825.97$
Labor 41,825.97$ Expenses:
Expenses 1,505.00$ Review Appraisal -$
Subconsultant -$ Appraisal -$
Contract Total 43,330.97$ Mileage/Travel 825.00$
Reprographic, Copy, & Printing 300.00$
Courier Overnight Postage 380.00$
Subtotal:1,505.00$
*TOTAL 43,330.97$
Abeyta Associates
10/10/2023 / City of Bremerton Project - Fee Supplement 1.05302023 Page1
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Goods & Services Agreement for Purchase
of a Cummins Emergency Generator for
Lift Station CE-1
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: PW&U/WWTP
Presenter: Eric J. Burris
Phone: (360) 473-5448
SUMMARY: The emergency generator at lift station CE-1 dates from the 1980s and is no longer
supported by the manufacturer. The City has standardized on Cummins emergency generators to
ensure compatibility with other equipment, and to help ensure parts and service availability. Staff
received a quote from Cummins in the amount of $113,011.08 including shipping and applicable
Washington state sales tax for a replacement generator for this location. Staff will perform all
installation and performance testing of the new generator upon receipt.
ATTACHMENTS: 1) Goods and Services Agreement; 2) Sales quote from Cummins; 3) Sole
Source Memo
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Funds are available from Wastewater Capital
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ Limited Presentation ☐ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve the purchase of a Cummins emergency generator through a Goods and Services
Agreement for $113,011.08 including tax, and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the
purchase with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 01/02/2018
A3
Page 1 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
GOODS AND SERVICES AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, is entered into between the City of Bremerton, a Washington
Municipal Corporation ("City"), and Cummins ("Vendor"), whose mailing address is:500
Jackson Street, Columbus, Ohio 47201-6258
The parties agree as follows:
I. VENDOR SERVICES. The Vendor shall provide the following goods and materials
and/or perform the following services for the City:
New Generator at Lift Station CE-1 per quote #Q-183740-20230630-1314, dated June
30th, 2023. These terms and conditions shall incorporate and include Cummins terms
and conditions attached as Exhibit A.
II. TIME OF COMPLETION. Vendor shall complete the work and provide all goods,
materials and services within 30 - 45 calendar days calendar days from the date all parties have
signed this Agreement.
III. COMPENSATION. The City shall pay the Vendor the total amount of $113,011.08,
including applicable Washington State Sales Tax, for the goods, materials and services
contemplated in this Agreement. The City shall pay the Vendor the following amounts according
to the following schedule:
To be Invoiced Within 30 Days of Delivery payment due net 30
A. Defective or Unauthorized Work. The City reserves its right to withhold payment
from Vendor for any defective or unauthorized goods, materials or services. If Vendor is unable,
for any reason, to complete any part of this Agreement, the City may obtain the goods, materials
or services on its own or from a third party, and Vendor shall be liable to the City for any additional
costs incurred by the City. "Additional costs" shall mean all reasonable costs, including legal costs
and attorney fees, incurred by the City beyond the maximum Agreement price specified above.
The City further reserves its right to deduct the cost to complete this Agreement, including any
Additional Costs, from any and all amounts due or to become due the Vendor.
IV. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. Vendor is and shall be at all times acting as an
independent contractor and not as an employee of the City. The Vendor shall secure at its expense,
and shall be responsible for all payments of income tax, social security, state disability insurance
compensation, unemployment compensation, and all other payroll deductions for the Vendor,
officer, agents, employees and subcontractors. The Vendor shall also secure all applicable
business licenses, if required, in connection with the contract services, including all required
licenses for Vendor's officers, agents, employees and subcontractors.
Page 2 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
V. TERMINATION. The City may terminate this Agreement for good cause. "Good cause"
shall include, without limitation, any one or more of the following events:
A. The Vendor's refusal or failure to supply a sufficient number of properly skilled
workers or proper materials for completion of this Agreement.
B. The Vendor's failure to complete this Agreement within the time specified in this
Agreement.
C. The Vendor's failure to make full and prompt payment to subcontractors or for
material or labor.
D. The Vendor's failure to comply with federal, state or local laws, rules or regulations.
E. The Vendor's filing for bankruptcy or becoming adjudged bankrupt.
If the City terminates this Agreement for good cause, the Vendor shall not receive any
further monies due under this Agreement until the goods, materials, and services required by this
Agreement are completed and fully performed by the City or a third party of the City’s choosing.
VI. CHANGES. The City may issue a written change order for any change in the goods,
materials or services to be provided during the performance of this Agreement. If the Vendor
determines, for any reason, that a change order is necessary, Vendor must submit a written change
order request to an authorized agent of the City within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date
Vendor knew or should have known of the facts and events giving rise to the requested change. If
the City determines that the change increases or decreases the Vendor's costs or time for
performance, the City will make an equitable adjustment. The City will attempt, in good faith, to
reach agreement with the Vendor on all equitable adjustments. However, if the parties are unable
to agree, the City will determine the equitable adjustment as it deems appropriate. The Vendor
shall proceed with the change order work upon receiving either a written change order from the
City or an oral order from the City before actually receiving the written change order. If the Vendor
fails to require a change order within the time allowed, the Vendor waives its right to make any
claim or submit subsequent change order requests for that portion of the contract work. If the
Vendor disagrees with the equitable adjustment the Vendor must complete the change order work;
however, the Vendor may elect to protest the adjustment as provided below:
A. Procedure and Protest by the Vendor. If the Vendor disagrees with anything
required by a change order, another written order, or an oral order from the City, including any
direction, instruction, interpretation, or determination by the City, the Vendor shall:
1. Immediately give a signed written notice of protest to the City;
2. Supplement the written protest within fourteen (14) calendar days with a
written statement that provides the following information:
a. The date of the Vendor's protest.
Page 3 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
b. The nature and circumstances that caused the protest.
c. The provisions in this Agreement that support the protest.
d. The estimated dollar cost, if any, of the protested work and how that
estimate was determined.
e. An analysis of the progress schedule showing the schedule change
or disruption if the Vendor is asserting a schedule change or disruption.
3. The Vendor shall keep complete records of extra costs and time incurred as
a result of the protested work. The City shall have access to any of the Vendor's records needed
for evaluating the protest.
The City will evaluate all protests, provided the procedures in this section
are followed. If the City determines that a protest is valid, the City will adjust payment for work
or time by an equitable adjustment. No adjustment will be made for an invalid protest.
B. Vendor's Duty to Complete Protested Work. In spite of any protest, the Vendor
shall proceed promptly to provide the goods, materials and services required by the City under this
Agreement.
C. Vendor's Acceptance of Changes. The Vendor accepts all requirements of a change
order by: (1) endorsing it, (2) writing a separate acceptance, or (3) not p rotesting in the way this
section provides. A change order that is accepted by Vendor as provided in this section shall
constitute full payment and final settlement of all claims for contract time and for direct, indirect
and consequential costs, including costs of delays related to any work, either covered or affected
by the change.
D. Failure to Protest Constitutes Waiver. By not protesting as this section provides,
the Vendor also waives any additional entitlement and accepts from the City any written or oral
order (including directions, instructions, interpretations, and determination).
E. Failure to Follow Procedures Constitutes Waiver. By failing to follow the
procedures of this section, the Vendor completely waives any claims for protested work and
accepts from the City any written or oral order (including directions, instructions, interp retations,
and determination).
VII. CLAIMS. The Vendor shall give written notice to the City of all claims other than change
orders within fourteen (14) calendar days of the occurrence of the events giving rise to the claims.
Any claim for damages, additional payment for any reason, or extension of time, whether under
this Agreement or otherwise, shall be conclusively deemed to have been waived by the Vendor
unless a timely written claim is made in strict accordance with the applicable provisions of this
Agreement; or, if (and only if) no such provision is applicable, unless that claim is set forth in
detail in writing and received by the City within seven (7) calendar days from the date Vendor
knew, or should have known, of the facts giving rise to the claim. At a minimum, a Vendor's
written claim must include the information set forth regarding protests in Section VI(A)(2)(a)-(e).
FAILURE TO PROVIDE A COMPLETE, WRITTEN NOTIFICATION OF CLAIM
Page 4 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED SHALL BE AN ABSOLUTE WAIVER OF ANY CLAIMS
ARISING IN ANY WAY FROM THE FACTS OR EVENTS SURROUNDING THAT CLAIM
OR CAUSED BY THAT DELAY.
Vendor must, in any event, file any claim or bring any suit arising from or connected with
this Agreement within 120 calendar days from the date the contract work is complete.
VIII. WARRANTY. Goods purchased hereunder are accompanied by an express written
manufacturer’s warranty (“Warranty) and, except as previously provided in this Agreement, is the
only warrant offered on such goods. The Vendor shall correct all defects in workmanship and
materials during the term of the Warranty set forth in Vendor’s Quotation (“Warranty Term”) in
accordance with the Warranty Term. Defects corrected under the Warranty are warranted for the
time remaining under the Warranty Term. The Vendor shall begin to correct any defects within
seven (7) calendar days of its receipt of notice from the City of the defect. If the Vendor does not
accomplish the corrections within a reasonable time, the City may complete the corrections at the
expense of Vendor.
IX. INDEMNIFICATION. Vendor shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers,
officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from any and all third party claims, injuries,
damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, arising out of or in connection
with bodily injury, death or tangible property damage to the extend caused by defective goods
manufactured by Vendor and delivered to City under this Agreement.. Vendor’s obligation to
indemnify shall not extend to that portion of damages caused by the City’s sole negligence.
The City's inspection or acceptance of any of Vendor's work when completed shall not be
grounds to avoid any of these covenants of indemnification.
Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW
4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or
damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Vendor and the
City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers, the Vendor's liability hereunder shall
be only to the extent of the Vendor's negligence.
IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THIS
INDEMNIFICATION CONSTITUTES THE VENDOR'S WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER
INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS
INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY
NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement.
X. INSURANCE. The Vendor shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement,
insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property that may arise from or in
connection with the performance of the contract work by the Vendor, its agents, representatives,
employees or subcontractors.
Page 5 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
Before beginning work on the project described in this Agreement, the Vendor shall
provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing:
A. Automobile Liability insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 combined
single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage; and
B. Commercial General Liability insurance written on an occurrence basis with
limits no less than $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for
personal injury, bodily injury, and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be limited to:
blanket contractual; products/completed operations/broad form property damage; and employer's
liability.
C. Excess Liability insurance with limits not less than $1,000,000 limit per
occurrence and aggregate.
D. Professional Liability insurance with limits no less than $1,000,000 limit per
occurrence/claim.
E. Workers Compensation insurance as statutorily required by the Industrial
Insurance Act of the State of Washington, Title 51, Revised Code of Washington and employer's
liability with limits not less than $1,000,000.
Any payment of deductible or self-insured retention shall be the sole responsibility of the
Vendor.
All required policies shall be provided on an “occurrence” basis except professional
liability insurance (if required), which shall be provided on a “claims-made” basis.
The City shall be named as an additional insured on the Commercial General Liability
insurance policy, as respects work performed by or on behalf of the Vendor and a copy of the
endorsement naming the City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance.
The City reserves the right to receive a certified copy of all the required insurance policies.
The Vendor's Commercial General Liability insurance shall contain a clause stating that
coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought,
except with respects to the limits of the insurer's liability.
The Vendor's insurance shall be primary and non-contributory insurance as respects the
City and shall contain a waiver of subrogation against the City for claims arising out of any
operations, liabilities and obligations to which coverage applies. It shall be an affirmative
obligation upon Vendor to advise the City’s Risk Manager by fax at (360) 473-5161, or by certified
mail, return receipt requested to City of Bremerton, Attn: Risk Management, 345 6th Street, Suite
100, Bremerton, WA 98337 within two days of the cancellation, suspension or substantive change
of any insurance policy required herein, and failure to do so shall be construed to be a breach of
this Agreement.
Page 6 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
The City also reserves its unqualified right to require at any time and for any reason, proof
of coverage in the form of a duplicate of the insurance policy with all endorsements as evidence
of coverage.
XI. MISCELLANEOUS.
A. Licenses and Taxes. Vendor shall possess a current Bremerton Business License
and any regulatory license required to fulfill Vendor's obligations under this Agreement. B&O
taxes shall be paid when due, and Vendor, by this Agreement, assigns any payments due under
this Agreement to the City Clerk for payment of such taxes which have been declared delinquent.
B. Conflict and Precedence. In the event of a conflict between the contract documents,
the document which rates higher on the following list shall take precedence:
1. Amendments / Change Orders to Goods and Services Agreement
2. Goods and Services Agreement
3. Specifications
4. Terms and Conditions
5. Vendor’s Proposal
C. Documents Incorporated by Reference. The following documents are incorporated
by reference, including but not limited to:
1. Terms and Conditions,
2. Specifications,
3. Proposal, and
4. Non-Collusion Affidavit.
D. Use of Photographs and Images. Vendor shall not use or distribute photographs or
images depicting City officials, personnel, property, or equipment whether prepared by Vendor or
provided by City without prior written consent of the City. The City will not unreasonably
withhold its consent.
E. Equal Employment Opportunity Statement. In the hiring of employees for the
performance of work under this Agreement, the Vendor, its subcontractors, or any person acting
on behalf of Vendor shall not discriminate in any employment practice on the basis of age (40+),
sex, race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation/gender identity, marital status, military
status, or the presence of any physical, mental or sensory disability.
F. ADA Statement. The City of Bremerton does not discriminate on the basis of
disability in programs and activities, which it operates pursuant to the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and ADA Amendments Act. This policy extends to both
employment and admission to participation in the programs, services and activities of the City of
Bremerton. Reasonable accommodation for employees or applicants for employment will be
provided.
G. Compliance with Laws. Vendor shall comply with all federal, state and local laws,
rules and regulations throughout every aspect in the performance of this Agreement.
Page 7 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
H. Prevailing Wages. Vendor shall file a “Statement of Intent to Pay Prevailing
Wages” with the State of Washington Department of Labor & Industries prior to commencing the
contract work. Vendor shall pay prevailing wages and comply with Chapter 39.12 of the Revised
Code of Washington, as well as any other applicable prevailing wage rate provisions. The latest
prevailing wage rate revision issued by the Department of Labor and Industries is attached.
I. Work Performed at Vendor's Risk. Vendor shall take all precautions necessary and
shall be responsible for the safety of its employees, agents, and subcontractors in the performance
of this Agreement. All work shall be done at Vendor's own risk, and Vendor shall be responsible
for any loss of or damage to materials, tools, or other articles used or held for use in connection
with the work.
J. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of Washington. If any dispute arises between the City and Vendor under
any of the provisions of this Agreement, resolution of that dispute shall be available exclusively
under the jurisdiction, venue and rules of the Kitsap County Superior Court, Kitsap County,
Washington.
K. Attorney's Fees. In any claim or lawsuit for damages arising from the parties'
performance of this Agreement, each party shall be responsible for payment of its own legal costs
and attorney's fees incurred in defending or bringing such claim or lawsuit; however, nothing in
this subsection shall limit the City's right to indemnification under Section IX of this Agreement.
L. Written Notice. All communications regarding this Agreement shall be sent to the
parties at the addresses listed below, unless otherwise notified. Any written notice shall become
effective upon delivery, but in any event three (3) calendar days after the date of mailing by
registered or certified mail, and shall be deemed sufficiently given if sent to the addressee at the
address stated in this Agreement.
Notices to be sent to: Notices to be sent to:
CITY: VENDOR:
Attn:Eric Burris Attn: Zach Schulte
City of Bremerton Cummins
345 6th Street, Suite 100 500 Jackson St
Bremerton, WA 98337-1891 Columbus, Ohio 47201-6258
M. Assignment. Any assignment of this Agreement by the Vendor without the written
consent of the City shall be void.
N. Modification. No waiver, alteration, or modification of any of the provisions of
this Agreement shall be binding unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative
of the City and Vendor.
Page 8 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
O. Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this
Agreement are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, that decision shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portion of this Agreement and the remainder shall remain in full force and effect.
P. Suspension & Debarment. For contracts involving Washington State or Federal
funding, Vendor hereby certifies, by signing this agreement, that neither it nor its principals are
presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily
excluded from participation in this transaction by any Washington State, Federal department, or
agency. Vendor shall provide immediate written notice to the City if at any time it learns that it is
or has become ineligible for certification. Should Vendor enter into a covered transaction with
another firm, Vendor agrees by signing this agreement that it will verify that the firm with whom
it intends to do business is not debarred, suspended, ineligible, excluded or disqualified.
.
Q. Entire Agreement. The written provisions and terms of this Agreement, together
with any attached Exhibits, supersede all prior verbal statements by any representative of the City,
and those statements shall not be construed as forming a part of or altering in any manner this
Agreement. This Agreement and any attached Exhibits contain the entire Agreement between the
parties. Should any language in any Exhibit to this Agreement conflict with any language
contained in this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall prevail.
R. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER TERM
OF THIS AGREEMENT, IN NO EVENT SHALL VENDOR, ITS OFFICERS, DIRECTORS,
EMPLOYEES, OR AGENTS BE LIABLE TO CITY OR ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY
INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OF
ANY KIND (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION DOWNTIME, LOSS OF PROFIT OR
REVENUE, LOSS OF DATA, LOSS OF OPPORTUNITY, DAMAGE TO GOODWILL,
ENHANCED DAMAGES, MONETARY REQUESTS RELATING TO RECALL EXPENSES
AND REPAIRS TO PROPERTY, AND/OR DAMAGES CAUSED BY DELAY) IN ANY WAY
RELATED TO OR ARISING FROM VENDOR'S SUPPLY OF EQUIPMENT UNDER THIS
AGREEMENT OR THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF EQUIPMENT SUPPLIED UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL VENDOR'S LIABILITY TO CITY OR ANY
THIRD PARTY CLAIMING DIRECTLY THROUGH CITY OR ON CITY'S BEHALF UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT EXCEED THE TOTAL COST OF EQUIPMENT SUPPLIED BY
CUMMINS UNDER THIS AGREEMENT GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM. BY ACCEPTANCE
OF THIS AGREEMENT, CITY ACKNOWLEDGES CITY'S SOLE RECOVERY AGAINST
VENDOR FOR ANY LOSS SHALL BE THE REMEDY PROVIDED HEREIN EVEN IF THE
EXCLUSIVE REMEDY UNDER THE WARRANTY IS DEEMED TO HAVE FAILED OF ITS
ESSENTIAL PURPOSE.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties below have executed this Agreement.
CITY: VENDOR:
Page 9 of 9
Goods and Services Agreement
Rev. 04/2023
CITY OF BREMERTON CUMMINS
By: By:
Print Name: Print Name:
Its: Its:
Date: Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
By: By:
KYLIE J. FINNELL, Bremerton City Attorney ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk
R:\Legal\Legal\Forms\FORMS ON COBWEB\Goods and Services Agreement Rev. 04 2023.docx
C Sales and
Service
June 30, 2023
Prepared by
Zach Schulte
(206) 794-9801
zach. t.schulte@cumm ins . com
We are p leased to provide you this quotation based on your inqu i ry .
Item Description
1 DFEK Commercial Diesel Generator Set, 500kW Standby 60Hz
U .S . EPA , Stationary Emergency Application
500DFEK, Diesel Genset, 60Hz , 500kW-Standby Rating
Duty Rating -Standby Power (ESP)
Em ission Certification , EPA , Tier 2 , NSPS Cl Statio n ary Emergency
Listing -UL 2200
Cert -Seismic , IBC2000, IBC2003 , I BC2006 , IBC2009, IBC2011
None-Vi bration Isolators-Normal Duty
Vo ltage -277/480 , 3 P hase , Wye, 4 Wire
A lternator -60Hz , 12 Lead , Extended Range , 105C
Housing-None
Enclosu re Pa i nt-None
Fuel Water Separator
Control Mounting -Front Faci ng
PowerCommand 2.3 Co ntroller
LCD Control Disp lay
Relays -Genset Status , User Configured
Alarm -Aud ible , E ngine Shutdown
Signals -Auxiliary , 8 lnputs/8 Outputs
Relay -Alarm Shutdown
Control Dis play Lang uage -Englis h
Ci rcuit Breaker or Entrance Box or Terminal Box -Left Only
Circu it Breaker -1200A, Le ft , 3P , 600/415V, SS RMS , 80 %UUIEC
Circu it Breaker or Termi nal Box Right-None
Bottom Entry, Left
Circuit Breaker or Entrance Box or Termina l Box, Right-None
Indication -Ground Fau lt
Exhaust Connector -NP T
Engine Air Cleaner -Normal Duty
Eng i ne Cool i ng -Radiator, 40C Ambient
Shutdown -Low Coolant Level
Coolant Heater -208/240/480 Volts AC , 40F M i nimum Ambient Temperature
Genset Warranty -2 Years Base
Lite rature -E nglis h
Packinq -None
2 OTECE, OTEC Transfer Switch-Electronic Control: 1200A
OTEC1200, Transfer Switch-. PowerCommand , 1200 Amp
Listing -UL 1008/CSA Certificatio n
IBC Seismic Certification
Application -Util ity to Genset
Cabinet -Type 1
Cab le Lugs -Mechanical, 4 -600MCM/Pole
Poles -3 (Solid Neutral)
Frequency -60 Hz
System -3 Phase , 3 or 4 Wire
Voltage -480 Volts AC
Genset Starting Battery -24V DC
PC40 Control
Auxi li ary Relay -Switch in Emergency Position -24 Vo lts DC
Quotatio n: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-183740-20230630-1314
Qty
1
1
Page 1 of 10
C Sales and
Service
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-183740-20230630-1314
Aux iliary Re lay -Switch In Normal Position -24 Volts DC
Interface -Communications Network, MODBUS RTU Module
Relay -Elevator Signal
Transfer Switch Warranty -2 Year Comprehensive
3 Vibration Isolator, Seismic-2000Ibs, 1.11" Deflection, 1802Ibs/in Spring Rate 6
4 Battery Charger-10Amp, 120/208/240VAC, 12/24V, 50/60Hz 1
5 Exhaust silencer and flex, shipped loose and installed by others 1
6 Battery boxes and racks 1
7 Delivery to site, off-loading by others 1
8 Generator batteries, Group SD 2
9 Start up and system testing with a 2 hour load bank test. 1
TOT AL: $ 103,490.00
7._,c '1 .l 1,, : 'I, f 2 I . O<J'
Quote va lu e does not include any tax.
EXCEPTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS:
~,~,.I 7,,./,,/ :1111, "''· o 8
No specifications or electrical drawings provided or rev iewed for this proposal.
COVID 19 SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT
AS A RESULT OF THE OUTBREAK OF THE DISEASE COVID-19 ARISING FROM THE NOVEL CORONAVIRUS , TEMPORARY
DELAYS IN DELIVERY , LABOUR OR SERVICES FROM CUMMINS AND ITS SUB-SUPPLIERS OR SUBCONTRACTORS MAY
OCCUR . AMONG OTHER FACTORS , CUMMINS' DELIVERY OBLIGATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO CORRECT AND PUNCTUAL
SUPPLY FROM OUR SUB-SUPPLIERS OR SUBCONTRACTORS , AND CUMM INS RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE PARTIAL
DELIVERIES OR MODIFY ITS LABOUR OR SERVICE. WHILE CUMMINS SHALL MAKE EVERY COMMERCIALLY REASONABLE
EFFORT TO MEET THE DELIVERY, SERVICE OR COMPLETION OBLIGATIONS SET FORTH HEREIN , SUCH DATES ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE (IBC) CERTIFICATION
The products in this quotation identified as meeting the requirements of the 2009 IBC have been certified by their respective
manufactures via a combination of analytical testing and shaker table testing. Not all products have been shaker table tested .
OFFICE OF STATEWIDE HEAL TH PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT (OSHPD)
OSHPD seismic requirements are continuing to evolve. Please contact Cummins for the most current requirements for meeting
OSHPD applications .
SELECTIVE COORDINATION FOR NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE (NEC) ARTICLE 700 AND 701 LOADS
Cummins generators are equipped with the manufacturer's recommended circuit breaker. Information regarding this device can be
supplied upon request. This quotation is not valid if any changes to this circuit breaker(s) is required to coordinate with other devices in
the electrical distribution system . If changes are required, the customer must provide a copy of the coordination study listing the
manufacturers part number of the disconnect device to be suppl ied with the generator and a revised quotation will be issued .
TRANSFER SWITCH WITHSTAND AND CLOSE RATINGS
Transfer switch(es), if included in this quotation , require a withstand and closing rating (WCR) capable of meeting the available
upstream fault current (kAIC). The WCR may be based on a specific breaker rating or a time-based rating, and it is the responsibility of
a qualified facility designer or engineer to verify compatibility. In the event that the proposed transfer switch(es) are not compatible , the
transfer switch(es) will need to be re-quoted to ensure compatibil ity . A full listing of the WCR can be provided upon request and will be
included as part of the submittal package.
CUMMINS STANDARD EXCLUSIONS
Exhaust System
All off-engine piping , hangers , flanges, gaskets , bolts , insulation , other materials and labor to install.
Fuel System
All fuel piping and materials not limited to; supply , return , venting, valves, coolers, filters, pumps , fittings, primary fuel regulator, storage
tank & senders, external to genset package . All fuel for testing and initial fill. Fuel tank vent extensions and flame arrestors unless
specifically listed in the Bill of Materials.
Cooling System
Intake louvers , exhaust louvers , air dampers , sheet metal ducting, flex adapters, sound
attenuators/baffles. All off engine piping , flexible connections , labor and coolant for remote cooling systems.
Quotation : Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
Page 2 of 10
C Sales and
Service
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE 1
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
Electrical
All off-engine w i ri ng, field terminations of wiri ng , and lugs other than those detai led in our sub mi tta l. Mo unting
Mounting bolts and anchors . Vibration isolators (if included) may be shipped loose for installation at the jobsite by others. Seismic
engineeri ng calculations .
Electrical Testing
Not limited to International Electrical Testing Association (NETA), i nfrared scanning , ha rmon ic content o r other independent agency
testing of switchgear, switchboards , protective relays , ci rcuit breaker, electrical coordination stud ies , arc flash studies and reactive load
site testing.
Environmental Testing
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), local air quality d istrict or other Authority Havin g Jurisd iction
(AHJ), incl uding acousti cal .
Programming
All protective relay settings , breaker settings , PLC programming or other use r configurable device programmi ng.
Documentation
Electronic submittals and operation and maintenance manuals will be provided . Printed copies are available upon request, additional
charges may apply .
Miscellaneous
Site specific label ing . Exhaust backpressure , ai rflow rest ri ction or vibration analysis
Design
Cummins is not responsible for system design or engi neering and does not guarantee system performance standards. Cumm ins will
supp ly documentation and reasonable assistance to others responsible for system engineeri ng des ign a nd performa nce .
Taxes and Permit
Any applicable sales tax , permits , fees , licenses .
Bonds
Any bid bond , payment or performance bond or other type of bond.
All items listed above are excluded and will only be supplied by Cummins if agreed upon , in writing, by a sales representative
for Cumm ins.
LEAD TIME:
Submittal
Typical submittal lead ti me is 3 -4 weeks after receipt of purchase order.
Equipment
Current lead-time fo r the generator is 45 -47 weeks after submittal approva l and re lease for production .
Please feel free to contact me if you require any additional information ; o r if you have any further questions or concerns that I may be of
assi stance with .
Thank you for choosing Cummins .
Submitted by:
Zach Schulte, Territory Manager
zach .t.schulte@cummins .com
(206) 794-9801
SUBMITTALS. An order for the equipment covered by th is quotation w ill be accepted on a hold for release basis . Your order will not be
released and scheduled for production until written approval to proceed is received in our office . Such submittal approval shall
constitute acceptance of the terms and conditions of this quotation unless the parties otherwise agree in writing.
THERE ARE ADDITIONAL CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THIS QUOTATION, INCLUDING LIMITATIONS
OF WARRANTIES AND LIABILITIES , WHICH ARE EXPRESSLY INCORPORATED HEREIN. BY ACCEPTING THIS QUOTATION,
CUSTOMER ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN READ, FULLY UNDERSTOOD
AND ACCEPTED.
Authorized Signatu re Date
Quotation : Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
Page 3 of 10
Sales and
Service
Company Name
Printed Name & ntle
Purchase Order No
Quotation : Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
<Rest of the page is intentionally left blank>
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
Page 4 of 10
C . Sales and
Service
TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR SALE OF POWER GENERATION EQUIPMENT
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
These Terms and Conditions for Sale of Power Generation Equipment, together with the quote ("Quote"), sales order ("Sales Order"),
and/or credit application ("Credit Application") on the front side or attached hereto, are hereinafter collectively referred to as this
"Agreement" and shall constitute the entire agreement between the customer identified in the Quote ("Customer") and Cummins Inc.
("Cummins") and supersede any previous representation, statements, agreements or understanding (oral or written) between the
parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. Customer shall be deemed to have made an unqualified acceptance of
these Terms and Conditions and it shall become a binding agreement between the parties on the earliest of the following to occur: (i)
Cummins' receipt of Customer's purchase order or purchase order number; (ii) Customer's signing or acknowledgment of this
Agreement; (iii) Cummins' release of equipment to production pursuant to Customer's oral or written instruction or direction; (iv)
Customer's payment of any amounts due to Cummins; or (v) any other event constituting acceptance under applicable law. No prior
inconsistent course of dealing, course of performance, or usage of trade, if any, constitutes a waiver of, or serves to explain or
interpret, the Terms and Conditions set forth in this Agreement. Electronic transacti ons between Customer and Cummins will be
solely governed by the Terms and Conditions of this Agreement, and any terms and conditions on Customer's website or other
internet site will be null and void and of no legal effect on Cummins. In the event Customer delivers, references, incorporates by
reference, or produces any purchase order or document, specifications, agreement (whether upstream or otherwise), or any other
terms and conditions related thereto, then such specifications, terms, document, or other agreement: (i ) shall be null and void and of
no legal effect on Cummins, and (ii) this Agreement shall remain the governing terms of the transaction.
1. SCOPE . Cummins shall supply power generation equipment and any related parts, materials and/or services expressly identified in
this Agreement (collectively, "Equipment"). No additional services, parts or materials are included in this Agreement unless mutually
agreed upon by the parties in writing. A Sales Order for Equipment is accepted on a hold for release basis. The Sales Order will not be
released and scheduled for production until written approval to proceed is received from Customer. A Quote is limited to the plans and
specifications section specifically referenced in the Quote. No other sections shall apply. Additional requirements for administrative
items may require additional costs. The Quote does not include off unit wiring, off unit plumbing, offloading, rigging, installation,
exhaust insulation or fuel, unless otherwise stated and mutually agreed to in writing by the parties. Unless otherwise agreed by
Cummins in writing, this Quote is valid for a maximum period of thirty (30) days from the date appearing on the firs t page of this
Quote ("Quote Validation Period"). At the end of the Quote Validation Period, this Quote will automatically expire unless accepted by
Customer prior to the end of the Quote Validation Period. The foregoing notwithstanding, in no event shall this Quote Validation
Period be deemed or otherwise considered to be a firm offer period nor to establish an option contract, and Cummins hereby reserves
its right to revoke or amend this Quote at any time prior to Customer's acceptance.
2. SHIPPING; DELIVERY; DELAYS . Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the parties, Equipment shall be delivered FOB origin,
freight prepaid to first destination. For consumer and mobile products, freight will be charged to Customer. Unless otherwise agreed to
in writing by the parties, packaging method, shipping documents and manner, route and carrier and delivery shall be as Cummins
deems appropriate. Cummins may deliver in installments. A reasonable storage fee, as determined in Cummins' sole discretion, may
be assessed if delivery of the Equipment is delayed, deferred, or refused by Customer. In the event Customer fails to take any or all
shipments ofEquipment ordered hereunder within thirty (30) days of the agreed upon delivery date , Cummins shall have the right, in
its sole discretion to either (i) charge a minimum storage fee in the amount of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month of the total
quoted amount; or (ii) consider the Equipment abandoned and, subject to local laws, may (a) make the Equipment available for auction
or sale to other customers or the public, or (b) otherwise use, destroy, or recycle the Equipment at Customer's sole cost and expense.
The foregoing remedies shall be without prejudice to Cummins' right to pursue other remedies available under the law, including
without limitation, recovery of costs and/or losses incurred due to the storage, auction, sale, destruction, recycling, or otherwise of the
Equipment. Offloading, handling, and placement ofEquipment and crane services are the responsibility of Customer and not included
unless otherwise stated. All shipments are made within normal business hours, Monday through Friday. Any delivery, shipping,
installation, or performance dates indicated in this Agreement are estimated and not guaranteed. Further, delivery time is subject to
confirmation at time of order and will be in effect after engineering drawings have been approved for production. Cummins shall use
commercially reasonable efforts to meet estimated dates, but shall not be liable to customer or any third party for any delay in
delivery, shipping, installation, or performance, however occasioned, including any delays in performance that result directly or
indirectly from acts of Customer or any unforeseen event, circumstance, or condition beyond Cummins' reasonable control including,
but not limited to, acts of God, actions by any government authority, civil strife, fires, floods, windstorms, explosions, riots, natural
disasters, embargos, wars, strikes or other labor disturbances, civil commotion, terrorism, sabotage, late delivery by Cummins'
suppliers, fuel or other energy shortages, or an inability to obtain necessary labor, materials, supplies, equipment or manufacturing
facilities. AS A RESULT OF COVID-19 REIATED EFFECTS OR INDUSTRY SUPPLY CHAIN DISRUPTIONS, TEMPORARY DEIAYS IN
DELIVERY, LABOR OR SERVICES FROM CUMMINS AND ITS SUB-SUP PUERS OR SUBCONTRACTORS MAY OCCUR. AMONG OTHER
FACTORS, CUMMINS' DEUVERY OBLIGATIONS ARE SUB/ECT TO CORRECT AND PUNCTUAL SUPPLY FROM OUR SUB-SUPPLIERS OR
SUBCONTRACTORS, AND CUMMINS RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE PARTIAL DEUVERIES OR MODIFY ITS LABOR OR SERVICE.
WHILE CUMMINS SHALL MAKE COMMERCIALLY REASONABLE EFFORTS TO MEET THE DEUVERY, SERVICE OR COMPLETION
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
Page 5 of 10
C . Sales and
Service
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
OBUGATIONS SET FORTH HEREIN, SUCH DATES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE. IN THE EVENT DEUVERY, SHIPPING, INSTALI.ATION,
OR PERFORMANCE IS DELAYED, HOWEVER OCCASSIONED, DUE TO EVENTS BEYOND CUMMINS' REASONABLE CONTROL, THEN
THE DATE OF DELIVERY, SHIPPING, INSTALI.ATION, OR PERFORMANCE FOR THE EQUIPMENT OR SERVICES SHALL BE EQUITABLY
EXTENDED FOR A PERIOD EQUAL TO THE TIME LOST, PLUS REASONABLE RAMP-UP.
3 . PAYMENT TERMS; CREDIT; RETAINAGE . Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties in writing and subject t o credit approval by
Cummins, payments are due thirty (30) days from the date of the invoice. If Customer does not have approved credit with Cummins, as
solely determined b y Cummins, payments are due in advance or at the time of supply of the Equipment. If payment is not received
when due, in addition to any rights Cummins may have at law, Cummins may charge Customer eighteen percent (18%) interest
annually on late payments, or the maximum amount allowed by law. Customer agrees to pay Cummins' costs and expenses (including
reasonable attorneys' fees) related to Cummins' enforcement and collection of unpaid invoices, or any other enforcement of this
Agreement by Cummins. Retainage is not acceptable nor binding, unless required by statute or accepted and confirmed in writing by
Cummins prior to shipment. If Customer fails to make any payments to Cummins when due and payable, and such failure continues
for more than sixty (60) days from the date of the invoice, or less if required by applicable law, then Cummins may, at Cummins' sole
discretion and without prejudice to any other rights or remedies, either (i) terminate this Agreement; or (ii) postpone delivery of any
undelivered Equipment in Cummins' possession and/or suspend its services until payment for unpaid invoices is received.
4. TAXES; EXEMPTIONS. Unless otherwise stated, the Quote excludes all applicable local, state and federal sales and/or use taxes,
permits and licensing. Customer must provide a valid resale or exemption certificate prior to shipment ofEquipment or applicable
taxes will be added to the invoice.
5. TITLE; RISK OF LOSS. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the parties, title and risk of loss for the Equipment shall pass to
Customer upon delivery of the Equipment by Cummins to freight carrier or to Customer at pickup at Cummins' facility.
6. INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE. Customer shall inspect the Equipment upon deliv ery, before offloading, for damage, defects,
and shortage. Any and all claims which could have bee n discovered by such inspection shall be deemed absolutely and unconditionally
waived unless noted by Customer on the bill of lading. Where Equipment is alleged to be non-conforming or defective, written notice
of defect must be given to Cummins within three (3) days from date of delivery after which time Equipment shall be deemed accepted.
Cummins shall have a commercially reasonable period of time in which to correct such non-conformity or defect. If non-conformity o r
defect is not eliminated to Customer's reasonable satisfaction, Customer may reject the Equipment (but shall protect the Equipment
until returned to Cummins) or allow Cummins another opportunity to undertake corrective action. In the event startup of the
Equipment is included in the se rvices, acceptance shall be deemed to have occurred upon successful startup.
7. LIEN; SECURITY AGREEMENT. Customer agrees that Cummins retains all statutory lien rights. To secure payment, Customer
grants Cummins a Purchase Money Security Interest in the Equipment. If any portion of the balance is due to be paid following
delivery, Customer agrees to execute and deliver such security agreement, financing statements, deed of trust and such other
documents as Cummins may request from time to time in order to permit Cummins to obtain and maintain a perfected security
interest in the Equipment; or in the alternative, Customer grants Cummins a power of attorney to execute and file all financing
statements and other documents needed to perfect this security interest. Cummins may record this Agreement, bearing Customer's
signature, or copy of this Agreement in lieu of a UCC -1, provided that it shall not constitute an admission by Cummins of the
applicability or non-applicability of the UCC nor shall the failure to file this form or a UCC-1 in any way affect, a lter, or invalidate any
term, provision, obligation or liability under this Agreement. The security interest shall be superseded if Customer and Cummins enter
into a separate security agreement for the Equipment. Prior to full payment of the balance due, Equipment will be kept at Customer's
location noted in this Agreement, will not be moved without prior notice to Cummins, and is subject to inspection by Cummins at all
reasonable times.
05.01.2023
8. CANCELLATION; CHARGES. Orders placed with and accepted by Cummins may not be cancelled except with Cummins' prior
written consent. If Customer seeks to cancel all or a portion of an order placed pursuant to this Agreement, and Cummins accepts such
cancellation in whole or in part, Customer shall be assessed cancellation charges as follows: (i) 10% of total order price if cancellation
is received in Cummins' office after Cummins has provided submittals and prior to releasing equipment to be manufactured; (ii) 25%
of total order price if cancellation is received in Cummins' office after receipt of submittal release to order, receipt of a purchase order
for a generator already on order with the factory, or is asked to make any hardware changes to t he equipment already on order with the
facto1y; (iii) 50% of total order price if cancellation is received in Cummins' office sixty (60) or fewer days before the scheduled
shipping date on the order; or (i v) 100% of total order price if cancellation is received in Cummins' office after the equipment has
shipped from the manufacturing plant.
9. TERMINATION. Cummins may, at any time , terminate this Agreement for convenience upon sixty (60) days' written notice to
Customer. If the Customer defaults by (i) breaching any term of this Agreement, (ii) becoming insolvent or declared bankrupt, o r (iii)
making an assignment for the benefit of creditors, Cummins may, upon written notice to Customer, immediately terminate this
Agreement. Upon such termination for default, Cummins shall immediately cease any further performance under this Agreement,
without further obligation or liability to Customer, and Customer shall pay Cummins for any Equipment or services supplied under
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
C . Sales and
Service
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-183740-20230630-1314
this Agreement, in accordance with the payment terms detailed in Section 3. If a notice of termination for default has been issued and
is later determined, for any reason, that the Customer was not in default, the rights and obligations of the parties shall treat the
termination as a termination for convenience.
10. MANUALS. Unless otherwise stated, electronic submittals and electronic operation and maintenance manuals will be provided,
and print copies may be available upon Customer's request at an additional cost.
11. TRAINING; START UP SERVICES; INSTALLATION. Startup services, load bank testing, and owner training are not provided
unless otherwise stated. Site startup will be subject to the account being current and will be performed during regular Cummins
business hours, Monday to Friday. Additional charges may be added for work requested to be done outside standard business hours, on
weekends, or holidays. One visit is allowed unless specified otherwise in the Quote. A minimum of two-week prior notice is required t o
schedule site startups and will be subject to prior commitments and equipment and travel availability. A signed site check sheet
confirming readiness will be required, and Cummins personnel may perfom1 an installation audit prior to the startup being completed.
Any issues identified by the installation audit shall be corrected at the Customer's expense prior to the start-up. Portable load banks
for site test (if offered in the Quote) are equipped with only 100 feet of cable. Addi tional lengths may be arranged at an extra cost.
Cummins is not responsible for any labor or materials charged by others associated with start-up and installation of Equipment, unless
previously agreed upon in writing. Supply of fuel for start-up and/or testing, fill-up of tank after start up, or change of oil is not
included unless specified in the Quote. All installation/execution work at the site including, but not limited to: civil, mechanical,
electrical, supply of wall thimbles, exhaust extension pipe, e lbows, hangers, expansion joints, insulation and cladding materials,
fuel/oil/cooling system piping, air ducts, and louvers/dampers is not included unless specified in the Quote. When an enclosure or sub-
base fuel tank (or both) are supplied, the openings provided for power cable and fuel piping entries, commonly referred to as "stub-
ups", must be sealed at the site by others before commissioning. All applications, inspections a nd/or approvals by authorities are to be
arranged by Customer.
12. MANUFACTURER'S WARRANTY. Equipment purchased hereunder is accompanied by an express written manufacturer's
warranty ("Warranty") and, except as expressly provided in this Agreement, is the only warranty offered on the Equipment. A copy of
the Warranty is available upon request. While this Agreement and the Warranty are intended to be read and applied in conjunction,
where this Agreement and the Warranty conflict, the terms of the Warranty shall prevail.
13. WARRANTY PROCEDURE. Prior to the expiration of the Warranty, Customer must give notice of a warrantable failure to
Cummins and deliver the defective Equipment to a Cummins location or other location authorized and designated by Cummins to
make the repairs during regular business hours. Cummins shall not be liable for towing charges, maintenance items such as oil filters,
belts, hoses, etc., communication expenses, meals, lodging, and incidental expenses incurred by Customer or employees of Customer,
"downtime " expenses, overtime expenses, cargo damages and any business costs and losses of revenue resulting from a warrantable
failure.
14. LIMITATIONS ON WARRANTIBS.
THE REMEDIBS PROVIDED IN THE WARRANTY AND THIS AGREEMENT ARE THE SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE WARRANTIBS
AND REMEDIBS PROVIDED BY CUMMINS TO THE CUSTOMER UNDER THIS AGREEMENT. EXCEPT AS SET OUT IN THE
WARRANTY AND THIS AGREEMENT, AND TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, CUMMINS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL
OTHER REPRESENTATIONS, W ARRANTIBS, ENDORSEMENTS, AND CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIBD,
INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY STATUTORY OR COMMON LAW IMPLIBD REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES
AND CONDITIONS OF FITNESS FOR A PURPOSE OR MERCHANTABILITY.
The limited warranty does not cover Equipment failures resulting from: (a) inappropriate use relative to designated power rating; (b)
inappropriate use re lative to application guidelines; (c) inappropriate use of an EPA-SE application generator set relative to EPA's
standards; (d) normal wear and tear; (e) improper and/or unauthorized installation; (f) negligence, accidents, or misuse; (g) lack of
maintenance or unauthorized or improper repair; (h) noncompli ance with any Cummins published guideline or policy; (i) use of
improper or contaminated fuels, coolants, or lubricants; (j) improper storage before and after commissioning; (k) owner's delay in
making Equipment available after notification of potential Equipment problem; (I) replacement parts and accessories not authorized
by Cummins; (m) use of battle short mode; (n) owner or operator abuse or neglect such as: operation without adequate coolant, fuel,
or lubricants; over fueling; over speeding; lack of maintenance to lubricating, fueling, cooling, or air intake systems; late servicing and
maintenance; improper storage, starting, warm-up, running, or shutdown practices, or for progressive damage resulting from a
defective shutdown or warning device; or (o) damage to parts, fixtures, housings, attachments and accessory items that are not part of
the generating set.
IS. INDEMNITY. Customer shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Cummins from and aga inst any and all claims, actions, costs,
expenses, damages and liabilities, including reasonable attorneys' fees, brought against or incur red by Cummins related to or arising
out of this Agreement or the Equipment supplied under this Agreement (collectively, the "C laims"), where such Claims were caused or
contributed to by, in whole or in part, the acts, omissions, fault or negligence of the Customer. Customer shall present any Claims
covered by this indemnity to its insurance carrier unless Cummins directs that the defense wi ll be handled by Cummins' legal counsel
at Customer's expense.
Quotation : Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
C . Sales and
Service
16. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT, IN NO EVENT SHALL CUMMINS, ITS OFFICERS,
DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES , OR AGENTS BE LIABLE TO CUSTOMER OR ANY THIRD PARTY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT OR IN
TORT OR UNDER ANY OTHER LEGAL THEORY (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, STRICT LIABILITY OR NEGLIGENCE),
FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, LIQUIDATED, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OF ANY KIND
(INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION DOWNTIME, LOSS OF PROFIT OR REVENUE, LOSS OF DATA, LOSS OF OPPORTUNITY,
DAMAGE TO GOODWILL, ENHANCED DAMAGES , MONETARY REQUESTS RELATING TO RECALL EXPENSES AND REPAIRS
TO PROPERTY, AND/OR DAMAGES CAUSED BY DELAY), OR IN ANYWAY RELATED TO OR ARISING FROM CUMMINS'
SUPPLY OF EQUIPMENT UNDER THIS AGREEMENT OR THE USE OR PERFORMANCE OF EQUIPMENT SUPPLIED UNDER
THIS AGREEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL CUMMINS' LIABILITY TO CUSTOMER OR ANY THIRD PARTY CLAIMING
DIRECTLY THROUGH CUSTOMER OR ON CUSTOMER'S BEHALF UNDER THIS AGREEMENT EXCEED THE TOTAL COST OF
EQUIPMENT SUPPLIED BY CUMMINS UNDER THIS AGREEMENT GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM. BY ACCEPTANCE OF THIS
AGREEMENT, CUSTOMER ACKNOWLEDGES CUSTOMER'S SOLE REMEDY AGAINST CUMMINS FOR ANY LOSS SHALL BE
THE REMEDY PROVIDED HEREIN.
17 . DEFAULT ; REMEDIES . Customer shall be in breach and default if: (a) any of the payments or amounts due under this Agreement
are not paid; (b) Customer fails to comply, perform, or makes any misrepresentation relating to any of the Cu stomer's obligations or
covenants under this Agreement; or (c) prior to full payment of the balance due, Customer ceases to do business, becomes insolve nt,
makes an assignment for the benefit of its creditors, appoints a receiver, commences an action for dissolution or liquidation, or
becomes subject to bankruptcy proceedings, or the Equipment is attached, levied upon, seized under legal process, is subjected to a
lien or encumbrance, or transferred by operation of law or otherwise to anyone other than Cummins. Upon the occurrence of any
event of Customer's default, Cummins, at its sole option and without notice, shall have the right to exercise concurrently or separately
any one or all of the following remedies, which shall be cumulative and not alternative: (a) to declare all sums due, and to become due,
under this Agreement immediately due and payable; (b) to commence legal proceedings, including collection actions and specific
performance proceedings, to enforce performance by Customer of any and all provisions of this Agreement, and to be awarded
damages or injunctive relief for the Customer's breach; (c) to require the Customer to deliver the Equipment to Cummins' branch
specified on the face of this Agreement; ( d) to exercise one or more of the rights and remedies available to a secured party under
applicable law; and (e) to enter, without notice or liability or legal process, onto any premises where the Equipment may be located,
using force permitted by law, and there to disconnect, remove and repossess the Equipment, the Customer having waived further right
to possession after default. A waiver of any event of default by Cummins shall not be a waiver as to any other or subsequent default.
18. CUSTOMER REPRESENTATIONS; RELIANCE. Customer is responsible for obtaining, at its cost, permits, import licenses, and
other consents in relation to the Equipment, and if requested by Cummins, Customer shall make these permits, licenses, and consents
available to Cummins prior to shipment. Customer represents that it is familiar with the Equipment and understands operating
instructions and agrees to perform routine maintenance services. Until the balance is paid in full, Customer shall care for the
Equipment properly, maintain it in good operating condition, repair and appearance; and Customer shall use it safely and wi thin its
rated capacity and only for purpose it was designed. Even if Customer's purchase of Equipment from Cummins under this Agreement
is based, in whole or in part, on specifications, technical information, drawings, or written or verbal advice of any type from third
parties, Customer has sole responsibility for the accuracy, correctness and completeness of such specifications, technical information,
drawings, or advice. Cummins make no warranties or representations respecting the accuracy, correctness and completeness of any
specifications, technical information, drawings, advice or other information provided by Cummins. Cummins makes no warranties or
representations respecting the suitability, fitness for inte nded use, compatibility, integration or installation of any Equipment
supplied under this Agreement. Customer has sole responsibility for intended use, for installation and design and performance where
it is part of a power, propulsion, or other system. Limitation of warranties and remedies a nd all disclaimers apply to all such technical
information, drawings, or advice. Customer acknowledges and agrees by accepting delivery of the Equipment that the Equipment
purchased ls of the size, design, capacity and manufacture selected by the Customer, and that Customer has relied solely on its own
judgment in selecting the Equipment.
19. CONFIDENTIALITY. Each party shall keep confidential a ny information received from the other that is not generally known to
the public and at the time of disclosure, would reasonably be understood by the receiving party to be proprietary or confidential,
whether disclosed in oral, written, visual, electronic, or other form, and which the receiving party (or agents) learns in connection with
this Agreement including, but not limited to: (a) business plans, strategies, sales, projects and analyses; (b) financial information,
pricing, and fee structures; (c) business processes, methods, and models; (d) employee and supplier information; (e) specifications;
and (f) the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Each party shall take necessary steps to ensure compliance with this provision by
its employees and agents.
20. GOVERNING LAW AND JURISDICTION. This Agreement and all matters arising hereunder shall be governed by, interpreted,
and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Indiana wi thout giving effect to any choice or conflict of law provision. The
parties agree that the federal and state courts of the State of Indiana shall have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute or claim
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
C Sales and
Service
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
arising in connection with this Agreement or any related matter, and hereby waive any right to claim such forum would be
inappropriate, including concepts of forum non conveniens.
21. INSURANCE. Upon Customer's request, Cummins will provide to Customer a Certificate of Insurance evidencing Cummins'
relevant insurance coverage.
22. ASSIGNMENT . This Agreement shall be binding on the parties and their successors and assigns. Customer shall not assign this
Agreement without the prior written consent of Cummins.
23. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. Any intellectual property rights created by either party, whether independently or jointly, in the
course of the performance of this Agreement or otherwise related to Cummins pre-existing intellectual property or subject matter
related thereto, shall be Cummins' property. Customer agrees to assign, and does hereby assign, all right, title, and interest to such
intellectual property to Cummins. Any Cummins pre-existing intellectual property shall remain Cummins' property. Nothing in this
Agreement shall be deemed to have given Customer a license or any other rights to use any of the intellectual property rights of
Cummins.
24. PRICING . To the extent allowed by law, actual prices invoiced to Customer may vary from the price quoted at the time of order
placement, as the same will be adjusted for prices prevailing on the date of shipment due to economic and market conditions at the
time of shipment. Subject to local laws, Cummins reserves the right to adjust pricing on goods and services due to input and labor cost
changes and/or other unforeseen circumstances beyond Cummins' control.
25. MISCELLANEOUS. Cummins shall be an independent contractor under this Agreement. All notices under this Agreement shall be
in writing and be delivered personally, mailed via first class certified or registered mail, or sent by a nationally recognized express
courier service to the addresses set forth in this Agreement. No amendment of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is writing and
signed by an authorized representative of the parties hereto. Failure of either party to require performance by the other party of any
provision hereof shall in no way affect the right to require such perfom1ance at any time thereafter, nor shall the waiver by a party of a
breach of any of the provisions hereof constitute a waiver of any succeeding breach. Any provision of this Agreement that is invalid or
unenforceable shall not affect the validity or enforceability of the remaining terms hereof. These terms are exclusive and constitute
the entire agreement. Customer acknowledges that the provisions were freely negotiated and bargained for, and Customer has agreed
to purchase of the Equipment pursuant to these Terms and Conditions. Acceptance of this Agreement is expressly conditioned on
Customer's assent to all such Terms and Conditions. Neither party has relied on any statement, representation, agreement,
understanding, or promise made by the other except as expressly set out in this Agreement. In the event Cummins incurs additional
charges hereunder due to the acts or omissions of Customer, the additional charges will be passed on to the Customer, as applicable.
Headings or other subdivisions of this Agreement are inserted for convenience ofreference and shall not limit or affect the legal
construction of any provision hereof. The Parties' rights, remedies, and obligations under this Agreement which by their nature are
intended to continue beyond the termination or cancellation of this Agreement, including but not limited to the Section 16.
Limitation of Liability provision contained herein, shall survive the expiration, termination, or cancellation of this Agreement.
26. COMPLIANCE . Customer shall comply with all laws applicable to its activities under this Agreement, including, without
limitation, any and all applicable federal, state, and local anti-bribery, environmental, healtl1, and safety laws and regulations then in
effect. Customer acknowledges that the Equipment, and any related technology that are sold or ot11erwise provided hereunder may be
subject to export and other trade controls restricting the sale, export, re-export and/or transfer, directly or indirectly, of such
Equipment or technology to certain countries or parties, including, but not limited to, licensing requirements under applicable laws
and regulations of the United States, the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions. It is the intention of Cummins to comply with t hese
laws, rules, and regulations. Any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary notwithstanding, Customer shall comply with all
such applicable all laws relating to the cross-border movement of goods or technology, and all related orders in effect from time to
time, and equivalent measures. Customer shall act as the importer of record with respect to the Equipment and shall not resell, export,
re-export, distribute, transfer, or dispose of the Equipment or related technology, directly or indirectly, witl1out first obtaining all
necessary written permits, consents, and authorizations and completing such formalities as may be required under such laws, rules,
and regulations. In addition, Cummins has in place policies not to distribute its products for use in certain countries based on
applicable laws and regulations including but not limited to UN, U.S., UK, and European Union regulations. Customer undertakes to
perform its obligations under this Agreement with due regard to these policies. Strict compliance with this provision and all laws of
the territory pertaining to the importation, distribution, sales, promotion and marketing of the Equipment is a material consideration
for Cummins entering into this Agreement with Customer and continuing this Agreement for its term. Customer represents and
warrants that it has not and shall not, directly or through any intermediary, pay, give, promise to give or offer to give anyt11ing of value
to a government official or representative, a political party official, a candidate for political office, an officer or employee o f a public
international organization or any other person, individual or entity at the suggestion, request or direction or for the benefit of any of
the above-described persons and entities for the purposes of inducing such person to use his influence to assist Cummins in obtaining
or retaining business or to benefit Cummins or any other person in any way, and will not otherwise breach any applicable laws relating
to anti-bribery. Any failure by Customer to comply with these provisions will constitute a default giving Cummins the right to
immediate termination of tl1is Agreement and/or the right to elect not to recognize the warranties associated with the Equipment.
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
C Sales and
Service
Project: City of Bremerton WWTP CE1
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
Customer shall accept full responsibility for any and all civil or criminal liabilities and costs arising from any breaches of those laws
and regulations and will defend, indemnify, and hold Cummins harmless from and against any and all fines, penalties, claim, damages,
liabilities, judgments, costs, fees, and expenses incurred by Cummins or its affiliates as a result of Customer's breach.
27. To the extent applicable, this contractor and subcontractor shall abide by the requirements of 41 CFR §§ 60-l.4(a), 60-
300.S(a) and 60-741.S(a). These regulations prohibit discrimination against qualified individuals based on their status as
protected veterans or individuals with disabilities and prohibit discrimination against all individuals based on their race,
color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or national origin. Moreover, these regulations require that covered
prime contractors and subcontractors take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment individuals without
regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, protected veteran status or disability.
The employee notice requirements set forth in 29 CFR Part 4 71, Appendix A to Subpart A, are hereby incorporated by reference
into this contract.
Quotation: Q-1837 40-20230630-1314
Public Works and Utilities Department
100 Oyster Bay Ave. N. • Bremerton, WA 98312 • (360) 473-5920 • FAX (360) 473-5360
Page 1 VENDOR NAME August 3, 2022
DATE: August 3, 2022
TO: Procurement File
FROM: Cami Apfelbeck, Water Utility Manager
Eric Burris, Wastewater Utility Manager
SUBJECT: Sole Source Determination
In accordance with Bremerton Municipal Code 2.76.090, Sole Source Purchases, the purpose of
this memorandum is to document the necessity of sole source procurement methodology for the
purchase of Cummins generators and generator services.
Reasoning (check all supporting options below):
☒ Compatibility to existing City standard or to existing equipment, inventory, systems, data,
programs or service. (Attach the business case for the standard and attach a copy of the standard
if it is written).
☐ Licensed or patented product with only one dealer. (Include a statement explaining why this
particular licensed or patented product the only one suitable for your purpose)
☐ Authorized service provider, repair and/or warranty services. The City requires service or
repair support for products or equipment owned by the City, and the vendor is either a factory
authorized warranty service provider or that particular vendor is required for warranty services
according to the conditions of a current City contract.
☐ Unique design: Requires unique features that are essential aesthetic requirements, or not
practical to match to existing design or equipment, such as artwork. Describe.
☐ Special bargain: This might include a surplus item, an auction sale, used equipment, returned
“open box” purchase, or other similar one-time bargains. Describe.
☐ Delivery date: Only one supplier can meet required delivery date. Explain why this delivery
date is essential. This can only be used in limited circumstances, for delivery deadlines that are
the result of an unanticipated situation, and not a circumstance that could have been reasonably
anticipated or averted by advance City planning.
☐ Project or research continuity: Product, systems, services or data must comply with an ongoing
project, research, data, testing or analysis without a compromise in the integrity of the project.
Also, this should be a situation that cannot be replicated by another company because there is a
Public Works and Utilities Department
100 Oyster Bay Ave. N. • Bremerton, WA 98312 • (360) 473-5920 • FAX (360) 473-5360
Page 2 VENDOR NAME August 3, 2022
legal or physical obstruction to disclosing the project information to allow another company the
opportunity to replicate. Examples include situations where a company has legal and/or
proprietary rights to customization such as software code, or to data; or testing or data is collected
through a unique measuring instrument that cannot be accurately duplicated and offered by
another vendor.
☐ Requirement by funding source: Lender, grantor (such as federal government) or other
provider of funds requires the specific product, service or system. Attach a copy of the document
that clearly shows such a requirement is imposed by the funding source.
☐ Legal monopoly: Only one supplier, such as electricity, water, or sewage.
☐ Trial and evaluation projects: A limited duration, limited scope pilot, trial or evaluation of a
product, range of products or services. A trial or evaluation project would typically be part of
establishing a standard for a City department, or to pilot a particular product or services for a City
need. Describe the pilot, specify the scope of the pilot, and attach information to confirm that the
pilot is part of a purposeful department pilot initiative.
☐ Other. Describe. Why is this the only company that can provide the sole source product or
service? The reference section reference section explains why a particular product, manufacturer
or service is necessary. The section below discusses why the company you request is the only
available company.
Cost/Quote support:
See attached quotes and service agreements. Our staff believes this is a fair and reasonable
price.
Therefore, it is my determination that it is in the City’s best interests to purchase Cummins
generators and generator services through direct negotiation, pursuant to BMC 2.76.090 and
2.76.010, and that sole source purchase of these Cummins generators and generator services is
justified for this procurement.
Recommended by:
________________________________ ________________________________
Cami Apfelbeck, Water Utility Manager Eric Burris, WWTP Manager
Approved by:
________________________________
Thomas Knuckey, Public Works and Utilities Director
Cami Apfelbeck Digitally signed by Cami Apfelbeck
Date: 2022.08.03 11:35:35 -07'00'
Eric J. Burris Digitally signed by Eric J. Burris
Date: 2022.08.03 12:11:49
-07'00'
Tom Knuckey Digitally signed by Tom Knuckey
Date: 2022.08.03 13:45:52 -07'00'
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Resolution No. 3367 to approve the
Extension of Wastewater Utility Services to
the Fisher Plat located within the East
Bremerton Urban Growth Area
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: Public Works
Presenter: Janelle Hitch
Phone: (360) 473-5285
SUMMARY:
An applicant has requested wastewater service for properties that are outside of the City limits within
the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area (UGA) and within the City’s Sewer Service Area. The
applicant has requested an extension of City sewer service to this property and is proposing 189
single-family residences in conformance with Kitsap County zoning.
Pursuant to the Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 15.03.040, properties located outside of the City
limits must annex to obtain wastewater services; however, per BMC 15.03.040(b) the City Council
can may approve service in certain circumstances, including when annexation is infeasible. Staff
have analyzed the subject properties and consider annexation infeasible at this time. The action
before the Council is to approve a Resolution for a Policy Exception to provide Wastewater service
within the East Bremerton UGA.
A Public Hearing was held during the October 18, 2023 Council Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 3367, Staff Memorandum
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): There are no fiscal impacts associated with this
request.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ Limited Presentation ☐ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to pass Resolution No. 3367 to allow the Fisher Plat properties to receive wastewater service
from the City of Bremerton pursuant to BMC Section 15.03.040.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 11/09/2021
A4
Page 1 of 2
Resolution Document Reference
Rev. 01/2023
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, authorizing the extension of wastewater
utility services to the Fisher Plat properties, located outside the
City limits by within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area.
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton has established a general policy for providing
City utility services beyond city limits in Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 15.03.040 per
Ordinance 5306 passed on August 17, 2016; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.03.040 of the BMC established a general policy that
properties located outside the City limits seeking wastewater utility services to said property
must first annex into the City; and
WHEREAS, Subsection 15.03.040(b) of the BMC identifies policy exceptions in
which the City Council, in its sole and absolute discretion, may provide City wastewater utility
service to properties outside the City limits without annexation; and
WHEREAS, Subsection 15.03.040(b)(1) allows an exception for cases where the
City Council determines that annexation of a property located within the City’s urban growth
area (UGA) is not currently feasible; and
WHEREAS, the subject properties (tax parcels 072402-2-107-2007 & 072402-2-
104-2000), are located within the East Bremerton UGA; and
WHEREAS, per annexation provisions set forth in Chapter 35.13 RCW, the City
may only annex properties that are contiguous to the city limits; and
WHEREAS, the subject properties are not currently adjacent to City limits, and
thus would require a larger area to be annexed to make annexation feasible; and
WHEREAS, to annex, through the petition methods of annexation as codified in
Chapter 35.13 RCW, a larger area would be difficult to annex at this time, as the City does not
have sufficient annexation agreements in place for this to be successful; and
WHEREAS, the owner of the subject properties has agreed to construct
wastewater infrastructure in and near the properties and connect to existing City infrastructure;
and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works & Utilities finds the proposed
extension of the wastewater utility services consistent with the Wastewater Comprehensive Plan
for the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
3367
Page 2 of 2
Resolution Document Reference
Rev. 01/2023
SECTION 1. Recitals Incorporated. The recitals set forth above in this
resolution are hereby incorporated by reference and adopted herein.
SECTION 2. Based on the findings set forth in the recitals above, the City
Council shall exercise its discretion as authorized pursuant to BMC 15.03.040, and the City will
provide wastewater utility services to the properties at the Fisher Plat (tax parcels 072402-2-107-
2007 & 072402-2-104-2000), located outside the City limits but within the East Bremerton
Urban Growth Area. A vicinity map of the subject property is shown as Exhibit A. This service
will be provided as annexation of the property located within the City’s urban growth area is not
currently feasible. Service to this property is provided conditioned upon the owner of the
property for which service is authorized execute an Outside Utility Agreement with the City
which grants the City of Bremerton a limited power of attorney to include owner’s consent to
annexation of the property as part of any notice of intent or petition for annexation presented to
the City of Bremerton.
SECTION 3. 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 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force
immediately upon its passage.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this _____
day of __________________, 20____.
JEFF COUGHLIN, Council President
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
KYLIE J. FINNELL, City Attorney ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk
R:\Legal\Legal\Forms\FORMS ON COBWEB\Resolution Rev. 01 2023.doc
To: City Council
From: Janelle Hitch, Managing Engineer – Development, of Public Works and Utilities
Date: 9/15/2023
Re: Fisher Plat Request for Utility Services outside the City of Bremerton City Limits
Request: The Applicant, John Fisher and Shawna Epp, have requested City wastewater utility
services for a proposed 189-lot subdivision in the Enetai neighborhood. The Fisher Plat is
proposed for tax parcels 072402-2-107-2007 & 072402-2-104-2000 overlooking Port Orchard
Narrows (the water body) to the east and bounded by the following streets: Hillside Drive NE, NE
30th Street and NE Enetai Beach Road (see Exhibit 1 Site Map).
City Council’s Decision: Pursuant to Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 15.03.040, “It is the
general policy of the City of Bremerton that properties located outside the City limits annex into
the City before wastewater utility services are provided to those properties. For the purpose of
this section, “service” means extension of and/or service connections to City wastewater utilities
to property located outside City limits.” The City Council may, in its sole and absolute discretion,
provide wastewater utility services to properties outside of the City limits if certain conditions
are met. The relevant exception for the Council to allow wastewater utility services without
annexation falls under BMC 15.03.040 (b) (1) "Annexation Not Feasible.”
Department of Community Development (DCD) Analysis of Annexation: Pursuant to Bremerton
Municipal Code (BMC) 15.30.040 when an owner of a property located outside the City limits
requests extension of utility service, the City Council may provide wastewater utility services to
those properties if annexation is not feasible. This portion of this document summarizes why
annexation for tax parcels 072402-2-107-2007 & 072402-2-104-2000 (the subject parcels) is not
considered feasible at this time.
Exhibit 2, attached, shows the location of the potential annexation request in Enetai. The figure
shows the city limits of Bremerton and the Kitsap County jurisdiction.
Per state law and Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies, you may annex property if it is contiguous
to City of Bremerton limits. As the subject properties are not contiguous to the City limits, the
City could not annex this property alone. To make annexation possible, more propertie s would
DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS, UTILITIES
& ENGINEERING
MEMORANDUM
need to be included into the annexation area to make this area contiguous to the City of
Bremerton limits.
When reviewing a larger possible annexation area (identified as the Annexation Study Area in
Exhibit 1), annexation analysis using the Petition Method of Annexation was performed. This
commonly used annexation method requires the signatures of property owners representing
60% of the total assessed property value of the area to be in support of the proposed annexation.
This proposed annexation area does not have the required 60% of the total assessed property
value as illustrated here:
Proposed Area includes:
~350 acres; see the Annexation Exhibit for the proposed annexation area.
o 483 parcels;
o Assessed property value of $169,023,410
60% of the total property value needed to finalize the process = $101,414,046
In order to make this annexation viable, the City needs to obtain annexation agreements or
petition signatures with the property owners within this area which equates to about $100
million in assessed property value.
Therefore, if the City received a Petition to Annex from the property owner, this request will
not be successful as the City does not currently have the support of 60% of the total assessed
property values for the properties proposed to be annexed. With the requester petitioning the
City to annex, the City would have 7.2% of the total assessed property values in the area
proposed to be annexed.
Proposed Wastewater Service Extension: In order for the City to provide wastewater service to
the Fisher Plat, the developer will be required to extend the existing sewer service. Per the 2014
Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, the project area is within the Trenton Avenue Sewer
Basin service area (“TRT-1”). The preliminary design of the extension that would service the
Fisher Plat is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and sized to accommodate future
development. The extension would include approximately 4,000 feet of 6 -inch force main and
a lift station. Capacity analysis of the existing system suggests that there is capacity in the system
to handle the additional flow at full future build-out.
Fiscal impacts of not providing utility service are:
Not receiving the system extension.
Loss of revenue of approximately $1.5 million in General Facility Charges; and
Loss of approximately $250,000 annually in usage charges.
Summary: As demonstrated in the DCD Annexation Analysis, a significant number of additional
properties are needed to support annexation of this area. As such, Public Works staff consider
annexation as currently infeasible. The City Council must decide in its sole and absolute
discretion whether to provide wastewater service to this property in accordance with BMC
15.03.040 (b)(1) - Annexation Not Feasible.
Exhibit 1: Site Map
Exhibit 2 – Annexation Study
Published for
October 18
Council Meeting
ITEM 6A – Public Comments
From: Sarah Palama-Hoffer <sarahpalama@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2023 10:31 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Garrett Jackson
<Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Ned Lever
<Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; kwalters@kitsap.gov
Subject: Re: Fisher plat
Good morning and happy foggy Thursday.
As you already know, my husband Blake Hoffer and I have been emailing the council and engineers
regarding this ever evolving plat. We live directly adjacent to the plat on Hillside drive N.E. and have
lived in our home since 2010 and purchased the empty lot next to us in 2015 from our elderly neighbors
that could no longer care for the property. When we moved into our home in 2010 our elderly
neighbors, whom have both since passed away, told us that The Cheney family, the former owners of
the property never wanted this property to be developed. So in 2016 when the county rezoned parcels
in the area to UR due to steep slopes and changing landscape we had hopes that Cheney Senior’s vision
for this property would remain. But instead his children that inherited his property and wealth,
petitioned to have the property remain urban low density. They sited that the property was unchanged
and that neighbors were against rezoning. This is absolutely false. Everyone in our community and
neighborhood know how much this property has changed over time due to excessive rain and severe
heat and know putting 200 homes on this property would be incredibly dangerous. The documentation
stated that the parcel had remained unchanged since 2012 and again, that’s categorically false. The
hillside which is designated critical area, has slowly been crumbling for the last decade. They also
sighted in this appeal that the parcel is “surrounded by subdivisions highly developed at a much greater
density” which is also false. Our home in particular is zoned as urban restricted (1-3/ac) and the council
members that drove through enetai are likely aware it is urban restricted on that side as well. The
county at that time must had believed the appeal was true because that particular plat remained urban
low while all other surrounding properties were rezoned to urban restricted.
To be honest, this should had not happened in the first place because all of the soil density and steep
slopes are the same on that plat so letting them keep the urban low zone feels dangerous. I will attach a
picture of how the property surrounding is currently zoned as well as a link to the Cheney foundation
paperwork I am referring to. I find this all mildly suspicious that the Cheney foundation fought so hard to
keep that particular plat zoned for urban low while also putting the property up for sale in 2015.
Personal opinion, they did this to make it more desirable to developers as the property close to this plat
that is currently up for sale and zoned urban restricted is sitting untouched. The Cheney foundation then
waited 3 years for the property to sell to the current owner, John Fisher who also recently acquired the
Winslow Mall on Bainbridge island and is upheaving small businesses to “revitalize” the space.
I will also attach an article from the Kitsap Sun that was published in 2015 with information on the
historical aspect of this property. It has a deep rooted history and the fact that there is potential it could
become a subdivision makes my stomach ache as this has been such an important part of Bremerton’s
history for so long.
I listened in last night to the study session through zoom, my husband was in attendance but we had a
sick child at home so only one of us could make it in person but I think Eric specifically had a comment
that really stuck with me when he said “what are the ramifications of our choice 10 or 20 years down
the road”.
I really appreciate you all taking the time to hear us residence next week at the public hearing as we all
know this is more than just approving potential sewer. Said extension would run through enetai creek
with is documented to have salmon. I would be happy to have any one of you out to our home to see
our community and why we are all fighting so hard for this incredibly diverse property to remain intact.
Per your 2023 agenda, this project does not meet the criteria of affordable housing and certainly does
not protect green space.
I only wish there was a way for the city to acquire this diverse property to help protect it for future
generations, similar to the grand forest that is protected through a land trust on Bainbridge island. With
all of its history, I would hope that would be worth something.
I honestly could go on and on but will save the rest of my thoughts for the hearing next week.
Have a wonderful rest of your week and we greatly appreciate all you do for our city.
Sincerely,
Sarah Palama-Hoffer
Cheney foundation rezoning document
http://compplan.kitsapgov.com/Documents/Cheney_PC_Hearing_May_10_2016.pdf
Property historical data from Kitsap Sun
https://archive.kitsapsun.com/news/local/storied-enetai-property-on-sale-for-5-million-ep-
1278293263-354474951.html
Blue is urban restricted and yellow is urban low density. This map does not include critical areas.
From: Karina Stone <karina.i.stone@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2023 1:03 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Opposition to Sewer Extension serving Fisher Property
Dear Councilmember Coughlin-
I am writing in opposition to the proposed City of Bremerton sewer extension to serve the un-annexed Fisher property
located at the end of Keel, Helm & Rozewood area. The consideration of such an extension is irresponsible for the
following reasons:
• The City has been unable to provide the annual and long-term maintenance cost for the sewer extension,
pump station, and associated emergency storage.
• The City has been unable to provide the rate increases to City of Bremerton residents to cover the cost of
the annual and long-term maintenance. City of Bremerton residents should not foot the bill for utility
services to properties that are not annexed into the City.
• The Fisher property seeked annexation, however the surrounding community was overwhelmingly not in
support of annexation. It does not appear the intent of the BMC to consider a non-contiguous parcel without
majority community support and still consider extension of City utility services.
• The preliminary sewer plan schematically located a sewer pump station within critical areas. The plan failed
to place the required 15,000 gallon emergency storage tank. When located in critical areas, failures of such
systems would have catastrophic impacts to downstream neighboring properties. The allowance of the
pump station and emergency overflow shall not be permitted in critical areas.
• The cost to surrounding County property owners to hook to sewer in such an event as a septic failure or an
addition to a home would be a burden that many could not cover. The connection fees and installation of
side sewer laterals (and in some cases individual e-one pumps) would be at minimum in the $20k range for
a single homeowner.
I urge the City council to closely consider the ramifications to not only City of Bremerton property owners, but also to
the surrounding county parcels within the UGA, should this sewer line be provided to the Fisher property. Please
take into account all of the items outlined above. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Karina Stone
Manette Resident
From: Brian Anderson <briananderson554@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2023 8:47 AM
To: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>;
Anna Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Greg Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jordan Lewis <lewisjcnw@gmail.com>; Andrew
Sharman <andsha@gmail.com>; Orrin Koepke <Koepkeorrin@gmail.com>; David Albright
<david@dalbright.com>
Subject: Vote AGAINST request to extend city sewer in East Bremerton
Dear Bremerton City Council,
I am writing to urge you all to vote AGAINST the developer's request to extend the city sewer out into
the urban growth boundary in East Bremerton.
If you have not already read the opinion piece in KitsapSun explaining why this would be a wrong
decision, I strongly urge you to do so. Link here
This topic was already decided upon by Bremerton voters, and the resounding will of the people was
against this.
I recognize there is a housing affordability issue; however, we are also in a climate crisis and clear-
cutting 50 acres of old forest to make way for 200+ homes in a critical watershed is not the solution.
Instead, I'd like to see more surface parking lots and abandoned buildings in Bremerton's core get
converted into housing. Our community should be pro-density and walkability - not pro suburban
sprawl.
As heat waves grow stronger and winter storms get more severe, these forested areas near our city will
play more and more of a vital role in terms of climate resiliency. I truly hope you will consider all these
factors and even go walk the proposed site to be developed before you vote to allow its destruction.
These valuable natural spaces once gone are lost forever.
Sincerely,
Brian Anderson
D3 Resident
From: Orrin Koepke <koepkeorrin@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2023 9:17 AM
To: Brian Anderson <briananderson554@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>;
Anna Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg Wheeler
<Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jordan Lewis <lewisjcnw@gmail.com>; Andrew Sharman
<andsha@gmail.com>; David Albright <david@dalbright.com>
Subject: Re: Vote AGAINST request to extend city sewer in East Bremerton
Agree, it’s an exploitative and inappropriate development for the area.
-Orrin Koepke
D3 Resident
From: Donna Homan <dlhoman2@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2023 9:51 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Fisher Plat
Concerns with Fisher Plat
Donna Homan
TO: City Council
FROM: Donna Homan
DATE: Oct 13. 2023
RE: Fisher Plat
Let me start by saying there have been no leters sent to the public about this proposal. I just found out
the day before the mee�ng. This affects all of us. Not only the hundreds of residents but also the forest
land, wildlife, habitats and the environment. What about the proximity to the water? I addi�on to all of
this, 189 lots will affect not only EMS and police services but schools, transporta�on, postal services and
waste management.
One of the reasons we moved to Rozewood was for the quiet street and safety. As you know, an atempt
was made in 2022 for annexa�on which failed.
I strongly do not think this proposal would be good for the public or the environment.
Thank you for your �me.
Donna Homan
3010 Rozewood Dr
From: Donna Homan <dlhoman2@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 10:42 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Public Comments - Fisher Plat (Donna Homan)
Thank you. I’m also concerned about the animals and owls in the neighborhood. There are so many
factors with this proposal
Donna
From: Ka�e Herzog <krherzog@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2023 4:48 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Enetai Beach development
I am a Bremerton resident and I am wri�ng to voice my concern over the proposed Enetai Beach
development. Besides the added stress and traffic to the neighborhood, demolishing more forest for this
project is unconscionable and directly contradicts the city and county’s stated climate resilience goals.
The neighborhood is livid over this plan, which will enrich outside developers while destroying what litle
forest we have le�. Please take our voices into considera�on.
Ka�e Herzog
From: David Gravenkemper <dgravenkemper@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 1:48 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Stop City Council Resolution No. 3367
Dear Bremerton City Council Members,
I am part of a property ownership group at 2256 Enetai Beach Road. I am requesting that the city
council stops Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of Wastewater Utility Services to the Fisher Plat
located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area.
The development in question is home to a delicate ecosystem that includes a salmon bearing creek
(Enetai Creek), home to multiple bald eagles, home old growth trees, and home to many other diverse
wildlife. The development calls for the building of 200 homes which would severely affect the current
ecosystem. I am asking that you put a stop to Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of Wastewater Utility
Services to the Fisher Plat located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area. This is not a suitable
location for urban development.
I am also requesting a copy of the environmental study completed for the Fisher development plan.
Please confirm receipt of this email and request for the environmental study.
Regards,
David Gravenkemper
11338 17th Ave NE
Seattle, WA 98125
dgravenkemper@gmail.com
206-552-3198
From: Stephanie Gravenkemper <s_gravy@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 2:42 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Stop City Council Resolution No. 3367
Dear Bremerton City Council Members, I am part of a property ownership group at 2256 Enetai Beach Road. I am requesting that
the city council stops Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of Wastewater Utility Services to the Fisher Plat located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area. The development in question is home to a delicate ecosystem that includes a salmon
bearing creek (Enetai Creek), home to multiple bald eagles, home old growth trees, and home to many other diverse wildlife. The development calls for the building of 200 homes which would severely affect the current ecosystem. I am asking that you put a stop to Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of Wastewater Utility Services to the Fisher Plat located
within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area. This is not a suitable location for urban development. I am also requesting a copy of the environmental study completed for the Fisher development plan. Please confirm receipt of this email and request for the environmental study.
Regards,
Stephanie Gravenkemper 11338 17th Ave NE
Seattle, WA 98125
From: Jack Gravenkemper <jgravenkemper04@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 2:44 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Cheney housing development
Dear Bremerton City Council Members,
I am part of a property ownership group at 2256 Enetai Beach Road. I am requesting that the city
council stops Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of Wastewater Utility Services to the Fisher Plat
located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area.
The development in question is home to a delicate ecosystem that includes a salmon bearing creek
(Enetai Creek), home to multiple bald eagles, home old growth trees, and home to many other
diverse wildlife. The development calls for the building of 200 homes which would severely affect
the current ecosystem. I am asking that you put a stop to Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of
Wastewater Utility Services to the Fisher Plat located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth
Area. This is not a suitable location for urban development.
I am also requesting a copy of the environmental study completed for the Fisher development
plan.
Please confirm receipt of this email and request for the environmental study.
- Thank you for your time,
Jack Gravenkemper
401 E Dean Boulevard a207
206-552-1365
From: jaglady56@aol.com <jaglady56@aol.com>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 3:01 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Stop City Council Resolution No. 3367
Dear Members of the Bremerton City Council,
I have been coming to 2256 Enetai Beach Road for 68 years, and I currently am part of the ownership of
the property. I am against moving forward with the development of the Fisher Plat, and
Iand I am requesting that the city council stop Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of Wastewater Utility
Services to the Fisher Plat located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area.
The development in question is home to a delicate ecosystem that includes a salmon bearing creek
(Enetai Creek), home to multiple bald eagles, home old growth trees, and home to many other diverse
wildlife. The development calls for the building of 200 homes which would severely affect the current
ecosystem. I am asking that you put a stop to Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of Wastewater Utility
Services to the Fisher Plat located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area. I believe that this is
not a suitable location for this many home as the wildlife that lives here needs protection. I enjoy seeing
the deer, eagles and heron.
I am also requesting a copy of the environmental study completed for the Fisher development plan.
I believe a full environmental study is required before moving forward with any development of this
property, and I am shocked and appalled that The council would move forward with this project without
an environmental study in place.
Please confirm receipt of this email and request for the environmental study.
Regards,
Cathy Hatch-Daniels
1337 Lower Marine Dr.
Bremerton 98312
and
2256 Enetai Beach Road
jaglady56@aol.com
206-459-1094
From: Brock Logan <brolo716@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 6:45 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Policy Excep�on for City Sewer Service to Fischer Plat
Bremerton City Council Members,
We write to urge that you not approve the requested policy excep�on to grant city sewer services to the
proposed development of the Fischer project in the vicinity of Enetai Beach, Rosewood and Helm
Avenues and East 30th Street in East Bremerton.
The people’s representa�ves had sound reasons for prohibi�ng non-con�guous areas from being
annexed into ci�es. For similarly valid reasons, the City of Bremerton has established, as a mater of
policy, that itwill not provide city u�lity services to areas outside of its boundaries. While the City
Council, in its sole discre�on, may approve an excep�on to this policy, doing so for this project, at least at
this �me, is not jus�fied and should not be granted.
The distance between the parcels involved and exis�ng City boundaries and u�li�es is too great to
warrant such an excep�on. There is insufficient exis�ng u�lity and transporta�on infrastructure to
support such a development - a problem the City of Bremerton will likely inherit in the future. Without
meaningfully addressing these issues, the complete lack of community support in the wider area to be
impacted by the proposed extension argues strongly against this policy excep�on.
We understand that the City is currently considering only the determina�on of whether or not to
approve an excep�on to exis�ng City of Bremerton policy that would allow the extension of city sewer
services to these parcels and that the City is not making decisions on the appropriateness of the
proposed development, considering environmental impacts, addressing density and affordable housing
issues, etc… Those considera�ons and decisions will made by Kitsap County. That said, the proper�es
involved are in the Urban Growth Area and are likely to be incorporated into the City of Bremerton at
some point in future. Therefore, the City has a vested interest in when and how this property should be
developed and should, at the very least, consult and coordinate with the County to ensure that any
development in this area is consistent with the City's and community's long-term interests and needs
and is both responsible and sustainable.
As noted above, it is not a foregone conclusion that this property will be developed, at least not in the
manner currently presented by the developer in its request for City of Bremerton sewer service. Kitsap
County has not yet weighed in on what they might approve and under what condi�ons. Given the cri�cal
environmental concerns, such as unstable slopes, watershed, wetland and wildlife habitat factors
involved, there is a lot to be considered. Sufficient �me, study, community input and evalua�on must be
allowed before a decision such as this is made.
Now is not the �me to abandoned well-reasoned City policy and rush through the approval of this
request for sewer services. If this mater comes up for a vote, please vote “No.”
Thank you.
Brock and Kim Logan
Community Members
From: EDWARD DAVIS <davis13489@comcast.net>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 7:48 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: We are opposed to the sewer system for the Fisher development
Our family owns a house on Enetai beach and we were alerted that the Fisher
development has a proposal pending for a sewer system and ultimately 200 home
development. Please do not approve this! The neighborhood would be changed
forever and this would bring further concerns about erosion, water runoff and traffic.
Edward Davis
2234 NE Enetai Beach Drive
From: Janna Krein <jannakrein@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 7:06 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Opposed to Enetai housing development
Hello,
I am wri�ng to express my opposi�on to the proposed Enetai Beach development, which will destroy
much-needed habitat for our wildlife popula�on while doing nothing to lower housing costs for our most
vulnerable ci�zens. The neighborhood is universally opposed to this development, and because you
represent the people of this neighborhood, it is your duty to reject it as well.
Thanks,
Janna Krein, Manete
From: Jeannie Gravenkemper <jgraccoon@comcast.net>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 8:22 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Stop City Council Resolu�on No. 3367
To Bremerton City Council Members,
My maternal grandfather, Oto B. Rupp, bought our 2256 Enetai Beach Road property in April 1924. Five
genera�ons of the Rupp/ Hatch clan have spent summers and holidays there. I am reques�ng that the
city council stops Resolu�on No. 3367-the Extension of Wastewater U�lity Services to the Fisher Plat
located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area.
The eco system of the plat area includes Enetai Creek which is a salmon bearing water, many Bald eagles
and their nests, old growth Douglas Fir trees, deer, plus many more birds and criters that will no longer
have habitat in which to live. Pu�ng
200 homes in a development there is not
a suitable loca�on for urban development.
Please confirm receipt of this email.
Regards,
Jeannie Hatch Gravenkemper
2238 Waverly Way East
Seatle, WA 98112
Jgraccoon@comcast.net
206 724 1831
From: Olivia Rose Muzzy <orosemuzzy@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 1:52 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Public comment re: Fisher Plat development
Dear members of the Bremerton City Council,
Please do not extend city wastewater services to the Fisher Plat development in Enetai. This area is a
wildlife corridor and includes old growth forest. Once this natural resource is disturbed, there is no going
back. To allow this step in development would be essentially approving clear cutting for some of our
closest (and oldest) forests near the city limits, and to lose that would be an ecological travesty right
here in our own community.
Olivia Muzzy
98310 resident
From: Stephanie Vezina <stephanielvezina@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 2:26 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Enetai Development
Dear City Councilmembers,
I am deeply concerned about the deforestation of this area. Based on the parcel map (see attached), these
parcels are currently marked as having multiple critical areas, which include high to moderate erosion,
streams (possible fish habitat), and Bald Eagle nests. Not only will development in this area lead to a
significant loss of food and habitat for animals, but it will also have a lasting impact on continued soil
erosion and depletion of groundwater levels - generating greater risks that will affect future generations, the
land, and the environment.
While I agree we need an affordable housing solution, this is compounding problems. We need a better
plan for affordable housing that is sustainable; a siloed approach is not serving us. We are in a housing
crisis and the problem isn't just a lack of inventory, it's also economical - including unreasonable financing
options, soaring prices, and the bidding process.
I've heard that the developer may be reimbursed for sewer connection fees when legacy homes are
required to connect. Do you know if this is true?
Thanks for making space for public comments in this process for the Enetai community.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Vezina (she/her)
m: 360-250-0650
e: stephanielvezina@gmail.com
📅📅 Schedule an appointment with me
Manette Real Estate Co.
1104 Pitt Ave.
Bremerton, WA 98310
Search for your next 🏡🏡 at www.househunter360.com
From: Scott Ballinger <scott@pareto.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 8:19 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; KWalters@kitsap.gov
Subject: Fisher development sewer connection
Hello,
I am writing to oppose the development of 200 new homes near our house in Enetai Beach.
The increased traffic & pollution will negatively impact our neighborhood. The proposed sewer line
extension serves no one but Mr Fisher, as evidenced by the resounding NO vote on annexation.
This is an environmental issue. A safety issue. A neighborhood issue. Please consider these issues before
allowing Mr Fisher to add 200 unwanted houses to our neighborhood.
Thank you,
/Scott Ballinger
2234 NE Enetai Beach Rd
206 713 6006 (cell)
From: Susan Ingham <sfingham@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 5:24 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Do Not Pass Resolution No. 3367 - the Extension of Wastewater Utility Services to the Fisher
Plat
Dear Members of the Bremerton City Council,
I am a property owner near the Fisher plat and am strongly opposed to Resolution No. 3367 - the
Extension of Wastewater Utility Services to the Fisher Plat located within the East Bremerton Urban
Growth Area. This area is a fragile ecosystem that includes Enetai Creek, a salmon bearing creek, as
well as habitat for many animal species including bald eagles, ospreys, herons, otters, dear, seals and
sea lions, and other diverse wildlife. There are also numerous old growth trees and other plant life that is
crucial to maintain to support these species. The extension of wastewater utility services will have an
extremely negative impact on this ecosystem and should NOT be allowed. Please do not pass
Resolution No. 3367.
Thank you,
Susan Ingham
2256 NE Enetai Beach Road
Bremerton, WA
and
2016 26th Avenue East
Seattle, WA
From: Charles Warren <apias.lab@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 8:27 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: proposed Rozewood development
Dear Bremerton City Council,
I am writing to you as a concerned citizen and property owner in opposition to the immediately-
proposed sewer installation and construction of 200+ homes on what is currently forested buffer land
adjacent to two small residential communities with dead-end road access: Rozewood and Enetai Beach.
It is unclear how the significant impacts of the sewer expansion and eventual development will be
mitigated, or if that is even possible. The current forested area targeted for development is immediately
upland of both steep upper-bank and low-bank waterfront, with limited current drainage and
floodwater control. Storm drain and sewer overflow management will inevitably direct contaminated
material into the drainage routes and onto the beach. The need for pump stations, impacts of failing
septic systems, and costs shifting to surrounding properties and taxpaying communities are significant
concerns.
As a utility provider, it is incumbent on the City of Bremerton to responsibly manage the timing and size
of potential expansions, and carefully consider the impacts and mitigations for the existing
community. Approval of the current proposed expansion is very premature, and until the many
unanswered concerns about overall development density can be resolved the applications for significant
expansion should be denied.
My family has owned property and various generations have lived in the Enetai Beach community for
more than 120 years. We are just asking that there be some balance and consideration of the current
residential density, and that this current sewer expansion not be approved until some overall concerns,
such as those above, can be addressed.
Sincerely,
Charles Warren
From: Wendy Rexin <plannerwendy@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 10:14 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Enetai Development
Hello,
I am curious to know if Bremerton has any guidelines for affordable housing units in new developments?
The proposed Fisher property development in Enetai purportedly aids in minimizing suburban sprawl,
but I wonder if there are any considera�ons for crea�ng affordable housing as part of the proposed
development? If not, it seems we are simply crea�ng more expensive housing in a town whose real and
desperate need is for affordable housing.
Thank you for your kindly considera�on.
Wendy Rexin
Enetai neighbor
From: Frederick Ingham <fingham@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 11:05 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Resolution No. 3367
Re: Resolution No. 3367
Dear City Council:
My family has owned property on Enetai Beach for over 100 years. We appreciate its serene natural
beauty. It was with great dismay that I learned of a proposal to extend city sewer service into this
undeveloped area to enable a residential development of up to 200 homes. This land is heavily
forested, which protects the slope from erosion and the Sound from toxic runoff. If a host of new
homes were built on this pristine land, there would be a significant increase in noise, crowding, erosion
and runoff of petroleum products, rubber, and lawn chemicals into Puget Sound.
Furthermore, it seems that this developer, who recently attempted to get neighbors to agree to
annexation by the City of Bremerton and lost nearly unanimously, is now trying to “end run” the process
by establishing this hookup outside of a democratic process. We neighbors have an interest in
preserving the unique environment of Enetai Beach, which protects Puget Sound and provides an oasis
for wildlife and neighbors alike. A wealthy developer should not be able to destroy the character of a
community without significant due process, review and community input.
Furthermore, it is my understanding that there has been no environmental impact assessment
evaluating the potential risks of extending the sewer line and building up to 200 homes on this
ecologically sensitive land. It would be irresponsible, (and potentially illegal?), for the Council to
approve this sewer line extension and the consequent denuding of 50 acres of forest land and building
200 homes without a very thorough, deliberate and public review of the environmental implications of
such a huge development. If I am incorrect, and such an environmental review has been done, please
provide a link to it.
You are our only hope to protect our land, our environment, and the character of our community. If this
hookup goes in, Fisher will doggedly pursue development to enrich himself at the expense of his
neighbors, the environment and Puget Sound. The only purpose of this sewer hookup is to enable this
oversized development. If you approve the one, you are guaranteeing the other will ultimately follow,
which will forever alter the character of this special part of our community.
I implore you to vote NO on this resolution. Do not initiate the destruction of 50 acres of forestland in
the heart of our community. This area is not appropriate for urban development and doesn’t need a
sewer hookup.
Fred Ingham
2256 Enetai Beach Road
From: Micah Hutchinson <hutchinsonmicah@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 9:03 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Proposed Fisher Development
Good morning, I am concerned about Bremerton's seeming support to provide sewer access to county
lands which allows for development of excessively high density neighborhoods. This recent trend of high
density development is alarming as it changes the face of our communities particularly as these
developments tend to age poorly.
I further understand there are environmental concerns with privately maintained septic systems and do
not think providing sewer access is a bad principle unto itself. However, the city providing utilities which
allow developers to circumvent reasonable density stipulations in order to maximize profits to one
entity while causing undue harm on the existing, mature forestland and communities in lieu of
establishing a reasonable development plan is failing the future of our community.
Thank you for your consideration,
Micah Hutchinson
From: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 10:15 PM
To: Sarah Palama-Hoffer <sarahpalama@gmail.com>
Cc: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Katie Walters <kwalters@kitsap.gov>
Subject: Re: Enetai/Fisher plat Instagram post by Jeff Coughlin
Hi Sarah,
I deeply appreciate all of your public input on this. Even though you are not a Bremerton
resident, I am more than happy to respond to your input. Since you live in the County, I'm
also CC-ing your County Commissioner Katie Walters.
As you note, I use my Council social media to alert my constituents to important items
coming before Council because I value Public outreach and engagement. My social media
has all comments disabled to ensure I comply with the Washington Public Records Act --- I
have it essentially set up as a bulletin board. Users are free to share my posts and do with
them what they will, but all comments on issues before Council are required to be e-
mailed to the City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us e-mail address to ensure they are properly
recorded in the Public record.
I wanted to highlight this issue because of the potentially far-ranging impacts that the
Bremerton Council's decision may have, and because my City district (#3) is one of the two
that are closest to it. The other district that is close is #2, represented by Councilmember
Frey --- the two of us took a long tour of the area and surrounding neighborhoods the other
week to ensure we are familiar with the area, which being in County is all outside our City
districts that we are most familiar with. It is because of the potential far reaching impacts
that the Bremerton Council decided at last Wednesday's Study Session to hold a Public
Hearing this week to get more public input, and not take any action until at least two weeks
from now.
• it is not deceptively complex.
By "deceptively complex" I was trying to convey that a seemingly "simple" decision of
whether to provide Wastewater service or not, as was presented to Council, has long-
ranging and significant impacts --- one that myself and the Council are taking seriously by
taking our time on this issue to get all the facts on the table and public input heard.
A land owner is trying to build a subdivision on a piece of property zoned urban low even though it is
surrounded by urban restricted. We would share hillside dr ne with this plat and while our property is
flat and free of wetlands, it is zoned urban restricted, which it was rezoned to in 2016. This particular
property was somehow able to remain urban low even though it is more greatly affected by
environmental changes than our property. Clearly that is not on the city but I personally see that as a
failure on the county when rezoning happens.
By my reading of the Kitsap County zoning map, the majority of land to the West of the parcel
in question is also zoned Urban Low Density Residential, but I appreciate that your street on the
NW corner of the parcel is zoned Urban Restricted. I would have to defer to Commissioner
Walters and the County on any reasoning for the zoning.
•When you say “the county has it slated for development” do you simply mean it is slated for
development at some point because it’s within the urban growth area? Urban growth plans are written
for areas that are meant to be annexed by the city within 20 years and this specific parcel and urban
growth area is now sitting at around 30 years
By zoning this parcel Urban Low Density Residential, the County has intended this area to be
developed according to the regulations of the Urban Low Density Residential Zoning.
• You mention the money you receive from the developer but fail to mention how much it will cost for
the city to maintain it and failed to mention to your constituents that the potential of increased rates
may also have to happen to help with maintenance fees.
By my best understanding, there would be no increase in cost to any Bremerton residents for
maintenance of this extension, as the money paid by property owners for sewer service pays
for the maintenance. And since there would actually be a 50% rate increase for users not in
City limits, my understanding is that the City would profit from this.
• You also mentioned increasing our local housing supply is desperately needed. I partially agree with
this statement but think that AFFORDABLE HOUSING is what is desperately needed. In order to recoup
cost, this subdivions in no way would be affordable housing. And according to the Comprehensive plan
update 2044 from tonight, it sounds like the city is more interested in building dense housing in already
dense areas of town. This subdivision also strongly goes against Washington legislation rcw 36.70A.020
Nearly all increases in any housing supply reduce the cost of housing across all economic levels,
but I too deeply agree we need affordable-rate housing, and I have supported many updates to
Bremerton's zoning in the past several years to enable increased density and support missing
middle housing. There has not yet been, by my knowledge, any indication on the price of
homes in this parcel should it be developed, but I would be interested to learn that, although to
conform with Urban Low Density Residential, it's nearly guaranteed these will not be luxury
homes. This area is in the County, so none of the city goals apply to it, and I defer to
Commissioner Walters and the County on any County comprehensive planning and how it
relates to RCW 36.70A.020.
•I think it’s fair to say that this is surrounded by neighborhoods but that is only a shred of an assessment
of this area. It is forested HISTORICAL property, part of old Bremerton that existed before any of us were
born. Home to native wildlife including but not limited to deer, owls, a bear and a pack of coyotes
This is why I pointed out to folks that this is a forested area, and why, even though I have no
control over the zoning and development of this area, I genuinely am taking this request before
the Bremerton Council seriously. There are many areas north of Manette and along the 303
corridor that have been developed with a loss of local forest.
If it weren't for the efforts of Councilmember Younger and past Councils to enact a Bremerton
ordinance that required these decisions to extend sewer service outside City limits to come
before Council, it is extremely likely that sewer usage would have already been granted without
any public input or involvement.
• Yes this project could continue with septic. While the information was not easily accessible on the
Kitsap county website, it appears pierce county requires a minimum of 12,500 square feet per septic
system which would cut his density down to less than half of any of
his development options and would not even put him anywhere close to urban low density.
Thank you --- one of the outstanding questions that Council raised at last week's study session
that we want to have resolved before any vote is taken is the requirements of septic systems in
Kitsap County, along with the potential environmental impacts of septic systems.
• I as a highly impacted resident understand that these battles will be ongoing in the urban growth area
and while I do appreciate you understand that this decision is impactful, I
Hope you understand that 100s of current resident in the uga and surrounding areas will be greatly
impacted by your choice. Members that have been part of this community for decades. This will set
precedent for similar choices you make in the future that could also affect our ever dwindling green
space.
I do. It's again why I suggested Council take this slow, gather as much Public input as
possible, and get all the facts on the table and questions answered before making this
decision.
I very much look forward to you attending the Council meeting Wed. and hearing your input
in-person, and would be happy to chat with you before or after as time allows. And
encourage you to also have conversations with Commissioner Walters, who I will also be
looking to for input on this decision.
Cheers,
Jeff
--
This e-mail and further communication may be subject to public disclosure, if requested under the Washington Public Records Act (RCW 42.56).
From: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 5:44 PM
To: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: FW: Enetai/Fisher plat Instagram post by Jeff Coughlin
Attn: Council President Coughlin
From: Sarah Palama-Hoffer <sarahpalama@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 9:26 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Enetai/Fisher plat Instagram post by Jeff Coughlin
Hello and good evening.
A friend within Jeff Coughlin’s district alerted me to a post he made on Instagram regarding the
proposed sewer extension to the urban growth area. While I appreciate him engaging with some of the
city dwellers that follow him on social media, I find it a bit discouraging that not only was commenting
turned off on that post(and it seems all other posts) but also the post was riddled with misinformation.
• it is not deceptively complex. A land owner is trying to build a subdivision on a piece of property
zoned urban low even though it is surrounded by urban restricted. We would share hillside dr ne with
this plat and while our property is flat and free of wetlands, it is zoned urban restricted, which it was
rezoned to in 2016. This particular property was somehow able to remain urban low even though it is
more greatly affected by environmental changes than our property. Clearly that is not on the city but I
personally see that as a failure on the county when rezoning happens.
•When you say “the county has it slated for development” do you simply mean it is slated for
development at some point because it’s within the urban growth area? Urban growth plans are written
for areas that are meant to be annexed by the city within 20 years and this specific parcel and urban
growth area is now sitting at around 30 years
• You mention the money you receive from the developer but fail to mention how much it will cost for
the city to maintain it and failed to mention to your constituents that the potential of increased rates
may also have to happen to help with maintenance fees.
• You also mentioned increasing our local housing supply is desperately needed. I partially agree with
this statement but think that AFFORDABLE HOUSING is what is desperately needed. In order to recoup
cost, this subdivions in no way would be affordable housing. And according to the Comprehensive plan
update 2044 from tonight, it sounds like the city is more interested in building dense housing in already
dense areas of town. This subdivision also strongly goes against Washington legislation rcw 36.70A.020
•I think it’s fair to say that this is surrounded by neighborhoods but that is only a shred of an assessment
of this area. It is forested HISTORICAL property, part of old Bremerton that existed before any of us were
born. Home to native wildlife including but not limited to deer, owls, a bear and a pack of coyotes
• Yes this project could continue with septic. While the information was not easily accessible on the
Kitsap county website, it appears pierce county requires a minimum of 12,500 square feet per septic
system which would cut his density down to less than half of any of his development options and would
not even put him anywhere close to urban low density.
• I as a highly impacted resident understand that these battles will be ongoing in the urban growth area
and while I do appreciate you understand that this decision is impactful, I
Hope you understand that 100s of current resident in the uga and surrounding areas will be greatly
impacted by your choice. Members that have been part of this community for decades. This will set
precedent for similar choices you make in the future that could also affect our ever dwindling green
space.
I very much look forward to the upcoming meeting on Wednesday. I’m really proud of our community
and we have spent years showing up for one another.
I promise you will hear less from me at some point this year but I feel it very necessary to speak up for
our aging neighbors that cannot make it to the meetings and for the ones that find the internet difficult
to navigate. I’ll try my best to keep my comments to 3 minutes on Wednesday. I tend to talk really fast.
Have a great week and we will all see you Wednesday.
Sarah Palama-Hoffer
From: Sarah Palama-Hoffer <sarahpalama@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 10:28 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Public comment for tonight
I have written and re written my public comment for tonight countless times and the tightest time I can
get it to is 3 minutes 30 seconds. In the event I get my time get cut off, I wanted the council to have my
full written comments from tonight.
Sincerely,
Sarah Palama-Hoffer
Hello and good evening council, I want to start by saying thank you to all of our neighbors and members of this community that have shown up in person and to those tuning in through zoom in opposition to this overhaul of the urban growth area and building of an entirely new city sewer system outside of city limits near critical areas. My name is Sarah Palama-Hoffer and my family and I are residents on hillside drive NE, directly across from the fisher plat. We have resided at this address since 2010 and purchased the empty lot next to our home in 2014 when our elderly neighbors were no longer able to maintain it. In 2016 both of our properties were rezoned from urban low density to urban restricted due to steep slopes and the physical characteristics of our properties. A portion of homes off of 30th, part of enetai beach road and portions of the properties now owned by the fishers were also rezoned to urban restricted due to the same changes. The previous owner of this plat appealed the counties decision to rezone the now fisher plat in question stating the property was unchanged since the last assessment in 2012. I am assuming the county allowed this appeal to proceed under the guise that it was in the urban growth area and could potentially be developed in the future. At the time, this parcel was up for sale, along with an adjacent property in enetai. While I cannot place the blame on any specific aspect of how this property was able to retain its urban low zoning, I do believe the county has a duty to confirm the zoning is appropriate for this area before the city approves a sewer build. Steep slopes, characteristic changes, and wetlands need to be addressed. In the almost 8 years it has been since the surrounding areas were rezoned, we have seen countless mudslides and temperatures over 100 degrees and under 15 degrees. There is absolutely no way this plat has been unchanged in that period of time. Making the choice to simply approve an entirely new sewer to be put in before any other assessments have been made would be reckless. It’s frustrating as a resident of this community to watch the city and county pass the buck back and forth on what should be done first. We hear “it’s the counties decision “ when we hear from the city. Then we hear from the county “oh that’s a city decision” so you can understand how that makes us residents feel. Like we have absolutely no representation. If the only representation we get is this 90 minute public meeting, it
feels almost inappropriate to give the city full control on approving CITY sewer to a property that has no definite plans to absorb into the city soon. We as a community already expressed our thoughts on annexation less than two years ago as it was an overwhelming no from the neighborhood. to think we will be forced to accept city lines on our property feels like our neighborhood is being sold to the highest bidder. And feels like we don’t even get a choice. Busses don’t come down the urban growth area so this in no way would be accessible to those riding public transportation, roads and sidewalks are built to county standards and would put a further strain on ems and fire services. I’m a believer in change and know in order for our community to grow, we need housing but we cannot fail to protect our counties green space and this development in no way would support the councils agenda to add affordable housing to our community. This is a for profit subdivision being built by a developer who does not even live in our community. According to an article published in the island wanderer the fishers split their time between Bainbridge island and London. They recently acquired The Winslow mall and have been drastically changing the small town charm of downtown Bainbridge. Please vote knowing how greatly this will affect our community and neighbors already living around and in the urban growth area. Those with jobs in our community, shopping at our local groceries stores, supporting local business in Bremerton, with children in our school districts and families that have cherished this city and community for many years. Thank you.
From: James Warren <jbwarren08@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 1:27 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject:
Dear Bremerton City Council,
I am writing to you as a concerned citizen and property owner in opposition to the immediately-
proposed sewer installation and construction of 200+ homes on what is currently forested buffer land
adjacent to two small residential communities with dead-end road access: Rozewood and Enetai Beach.
It is unclear how the significant impacts of the sewer expansion and eventual development will be
mitigated, or if that is even possible. The current forested area targeted for development is immediately
upland of both steep upper-bank and low-bank waterfront, with limited current drainage and
floodwater control. Storm drain and sewer overflow management will inevitably direct contaminated
material into the drainage routes and onto the beach. The need for pump stations, impacts of failing
septic systems, and costs shifting to surrounding properties and taxpaying communities are significant
concerns.
As a utility provider, it is incumbent on the City of Bremerton to responsibly manage the timing and size
of potential expansions, and carefully consider the impacts and mitigations for the existing
community. Approval of the current proposed expansion is very premature, and until the many
unanswered concerns about overall development density can be resolved the applications for significant
expansion should be denied.
My family has owned property and various generations have lived in the Enetai Beach community for
more than 120 years. We are just asking that there be some balance and consideration of the current
residential density, and that this current sewer expansion not be approved until some overall concerns,
such as those above, can be addressed.
Sincerely,
James Warren
From: Blake Hoffer <blakejhoffer@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 8:39 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Public Comments - Fisher Plat Project (Blake Hoffer)
Good morning-
I have been working on my public comments for the meeting this evening and it appears I have too
much to say to stay within the three minute time limit. Is there a way to suspend the time limit for my
comments or beg/borrow time from other community members? I will copy my full statement below in
hopes of getting the full text included in the documented public comments. I have reduced the
comments considerably in an effort to get under the three minute limit (I’ve gone from over ten minutes
to just over five minutes), but a further reduction would be required. Reducing much more will miss
valuable points that the public needs to hear tonight.
Here are my full, unreduced comments for your consideration:
My name is Blake Hoffer and I have lived in my home which is bordering what is now the Fisher
plat since 2010. I have already sent the City several emails containing a lot of concerns I have
with the proposed wastewater extension and I am sure to speak tonight on at least some similar
themes, as well as others, so this will not entirely be a repeat of those emails. I trust the Council
has been provided with my emails and has read them.
I attended the study session for this proposal last week and some of the statements from the
Council have really resonated with me. First, it was stated that people who currently have septic
that could fail in the future would feel pretty lucky if this wastewater extension is provided so
they can just hook up to the City’s system. While I will not discount this experience entirely
because I am sure it can and does happen, I will offer an alternative viewpoint. First, I would like
to point out that if City sewer was such a widespread relief for the public, then it would seem the
mandate to require anyone in close proximity to hook up to it at some point is unnecessary. In
my particular situation, my property borders the proposed development area and should my
septic fail, I would undoubtedly be required to hook into the City’s system. However, a portion of
my property is reserved from development so that I have space available should my septic fail
and I need a new one. Being required to hook into the City’s system, even if it is more
economical to simply install a new septic system is a very real concern for me. Additionally,
there are other circumstances that may also force us to hook up to the City’s system, like an
addition to our house. This is something my wife and I have been planning and saving for for
several years. To find out that we need to save a quite large additional sum of money to execute
our long planned addition and move it several more years into the future is again a very real
concern for me. To summarize this point bluntly, I do not need City sewer and I do not want City
sewer.
A couple other items discussed during the study session that have stuck with me were first the
opinion that the Council should put blinders on to ignore every aspect of this wastewater
extension request and merely focus on how the City engineering staff performed preliminary
calculations and the City’s wastewater system was determined to be adequate to accept the
expected additional loading from the proposed development. As an engineer myself, I
understand the urge to just go with the numbers and take this very narrow viewpoint, however I
wholeheartedly disagree with it. This wastewater extension request has huge ramifications that
demand the Council to take a much wider viewpoint and consider all the consequences of an
approval to this request. I was somewhat relieved to hear later in the study session that
Bremerton Municipal Code 15.03.040, the code governing this wastewater extension request,
was created to be a mechanism to stop developers from always being able to connect to the
City’s wastewater system. In essence, this code mandates the Council to review the full picture
and circumstances, not merely leave this a rubber stamp process after preliminary calculations
by City engineers. This is where we find ourselves today, with the community helping to provide
opinions and details about this request not from the viewpoint of a developer financially
incentivized to push this request through, but from the viewpoint of the surrounding community
that will be left behind to live with the consequences of any development, should it be
approved.
The last piece of information from the study session that I would like to comment on was the
statement by the City engineers regarding the expectation for the City to generate $250,000 per
year from user fees for the proposed development. City engineers made no mention of any cost
the City will surely incur due to new equipment/systems and increased demand on existing
infrastructure (e.g. increased operation and maintenance costs, the potential to need additional
staffing, any impact this new obligation could have on rate payers within City limits, etc.). This
statement appeared to lack the required information and any proof of thorough consideration to
make such a claim.
As I said earlier, I have lived in the surrounding neighborhood since 2010 and my wife and I
have lived through several phases of life in our house. We started out just the two of us, but
then soon after moving in, we added two dogs to our home. Incrementally, we also added two
children to our family and this community has been a part of their entire lives. I started working
at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in 2006, but in 2014, I moved to a new position with the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA). To avoid any ethics issues, let me state that what I have written
is my own personal position and does not reflect any FAA policy. I really enjoy my job and I
would like to keep it. The offices for this new position were in Renton at the time, so being faced
with a considerable commute, my wife and I considered moving for the first time. In the end, we
decided our roots ran too deep in our home and community to move, so I found a vanpool and
got used to commuting. My position with the FAA requires frequent travel for extended periods
of time. Knowing my family has a community they can rely on if something adverse should
happen while I am away is a big deal to me. Being part of a small community that watches out
for each other, shovels driveways for each other if we receive snow, checks in if it has been any
abnormal length of time since we have seen each other is a big deal to me. Worrying about my
kids getting hit by one of the 400 new vehicles making one of the 2,000 predicted end trips per
day on streets not designed for this amount of traffic is a big deal to me. This entire community
would be negatively impacted if the development is allowed to be built at the proposed density,
in no small part because a wastewater extension request is approved by the Council. Make no
mistake, a vote in favor of this proposed wastewater extension is a vote in favor of developing
this untouched wilderness area to the maximum extent possible, no matter the consequences
on nature and the surrounding communities.
I think it is fair to say that without an approved wastewater extension request, any development
of the Fisher plat would look much different, specifically the number of homes would need to be
drastically reduced. Not denied entirely, but reduced. So, why is the development proposing
such high housing densities, housing densities much higher than the surrounding communities?
That answer must be based in profit. I understand that profit is not always bad, in some cases
portions of profit can go to funding new research that the world desperately needs. But, this is
not that kind of profit. This profit is the old fashioned kind. The kind where nature and local
communities are irreparably harmed, while a select few individuals reap the rewards. In one
interview the property owners gave in support of a business they own on Bainbridge Island, the
owners stated they split their time between Bainbridge Island and London. So in this case, these
select few individuals reaping the rewards are not even part of the local community. They will
not be faced with any long term negative consequences of this development.
As a dedicated civil servant my whole professional career up to today (and hopefully my entire
career), I can say that I take pride in knowing society gets to benefit from my work. I will never
have millions of dollars available in my budget to buy large properties, but I can live with that. I
also find myself uplifted when I read about emerging evidence showing that current job seekers
are looking into company values to see if they match their own when they are contemplating job
offers or looking where to apply. This can be a strong tool for changing how society operates
and adds new considerations in the profit equation. I do not know any of the Council members
personally, so I can only guess at what your core values may be. Since each of you represent
the community, I can hope that at least some of our core values are similar. I have reviewed the
2023 City Council Goals and Priorities and I certainly see some common ground between our
values. What I do not see is anything supporting a development like this proposal represented
anywhere on that document. This development is definitely not going to support affordable
housing and it will not build what the Council defines as “Missing Middle Housing”. In fact, I
would argue the proposed development directly conflicts with some of the Council’s Goals and
Priorities, specifically developing policies that encourage environmental stewardship as one
example.
In closing, I would like to summarize by saying that there are ample reasons for the Council to
vote against the requested wastewater extension. Bremerton Municipal Code 15.03.040 puts
this decision on the Council, so now we, the impacted community, ask the Council to see the
negative consequences of approving this wastewater extension request far outweigh any
supposed benefits and vote against this proposal.
Blake Hoffer
Published for
October 11
Study Session
ITEM A5 – Public Comments
From: Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, October 6, 2023 2:14 PM
To: Blake Hoffer <blakejhoffer@gmail.com>
Cc: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: RE: Fisher Plat Project
Good Afternoon,
Thank you for your message. I have copied the City Council to inform them on the community interest
in this matter.
The owners of the Fisher Property have requested wastewater service for the proposed
development. The property is outside City Limits but withing the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area
(UGA) which is a designated wastewater service area. The City’s 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan
Update can be found at: https://www.bremertonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1972/2014-
Wastewater-Comprehensive-Plan-PDF?bidId= this document contains information about the East
Bremerton UGA and the conceptual plans for providing service to this area.
To provide wastewater service to the Fisher Plat, an extension of service would be required to be
designed, installed, and funded by the developer if the City Council agrees to provide service. The
constructed sewer main and pump station would be transferred to the City for operation and
maintenance. The developer has provided a Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis (attached) completed by
Team4 Engineering with a conceptual design for the extension. The proposed system is designed to
include a contributing area beyond the proposed plat boundary so that property owners in the vicinity
could connect to the service if needed in the future.
Attached is a copy of our standard Outside Utility Agreement per your request.
Sincerely,
Janelle Hitch, P.E.
Managing Engineer – Development
Public Works & Utilities – Engineering
(360) 473-5285
Janelle.hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us
From: Blake Hoffer <blakejhoffer@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2023 9:46 PM
To: Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Fwd: Fisher Plat Project
Please see email below.
Blake Hoffer
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Blake Hoffer <blakejhoffer@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 8:33 PM
Subject: Fisher Plat Project
To: <mark@team4eng.com>, <tim@team4eng.com>
CC: Garrett Jackson <Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Good evening-
I am writing to inquire about the subject development project in Kitsap County. It is my understanding
that the local survey to annex the project property, as well as the surrounding area, into Bremerton
failed to yield the developer’s desired result. Other attempts to force the annexation have also failed, so
now it is up to the Bremerton City Council to subvert the will of the community and potentially provide
utilities to support the development of the property.
Reading through Bremerton Municipal Code 15.03.040, providing utilities in this manner would only be
allowed if the City Council determines it is necessary or appropriate due to the previous failed
annexation efforts. On what grounds is the developer basing the necessity of this utility connection that
would be an exception to general policy per the previously mentioned code? Additionally, per the code,
in order to receive the City of Bremerton utility service, the property owner must execute an Outside
Utility Agreement with the City. Can you please share this agreement? Can you also please share any
plans of feasibility? From my understanding of the developer’s plan, the development will require a
pump station and long connection runs to existing City lines. If the development is not annexed into
Bremerton, who pays to install, operate, and maintain these systems? Furthermore, as a property owner
adjacent to the development area, how am I affected by Bremerton Municipal Code 15.03.050? This
property development plan appears to directly impact my neighbors and me in many negative ways.
Blake Hoffer
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page i 9/12/2023
Table of Contents
I. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1
II. Project Location............................................................................................................ 1
III. Proposed Design Flows ................................................................................................ 2
A. Contributing Area ...................................................................................................... 2
B. Proposed Design Flows ............................................................................................. 4
C. Recommended Design Flows .................................................................................... 4
IV. Baseline Data ............................................................................................................... 5
D. Baseline Service Areas and Flows ............................................................................ 6
E. Baseline Flow Data.................................................................................................. 11
Bremerton General Commercial (GC) Zone ....................................................... 11
Existing Dwelling Units ...................................................................................... 12
Baseline Flows 12
F. SSA Model of Baseline Data ................................................................................... 13
Baseline at Minimum Flows ............................................................................... 13
Baseline at Average Flows ................................................................................ 13
Baseline at Maximum Flows .............................................................................. 13
G. Recommended Baseline Flows ............................................................................... 13
V. Force Main Route Alternatives ................................................................................... 13
A. Route 1: NE 30th Street & Perry Avenue ................................................................ 14
B. Route 2: NE Fruitland Street & Perry Avenue ......................................................... 15
C. Route 3: NE Stone Way & Perry Avenue ................................................................ 16
D. Route 4: Cascade Trail & Perry Avenue ................................................................. 17
E. Recommended Force Main Route ........................................................................... 18
VI. Perry Avenue Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis ........................................................ 18
A. Proposed Pumping Station Design Flows at Maxmimum Denisty ............................ 18
B. Baseline Flows at Maxmimum Denisty .................................................................... 18
C. Baseline and Pumping Station Flows at Maxmimum Denisty ................................... 18
VII. Pump Station Sizing ................................................................................................... 19
A. Wet Well .................................................................................................................. 19
B. Electrical Service ..................................................................................................... 19
C. Force Main Pipe Size .............................................................................................. 19
D. Pump Sizing ............................................................................................................ 20
VIII. Conclusions and Recommendations .......................................................................... 20
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page ii 9/12/2023
Appendicies
Appendix A Pre-Submittal Report BP21 00148
Appendix B City of Bremerton Engineering Department Contributing Area Request
Appendix C Baseline Flow SSA Analysis – Minimum Density
Appendix D Baseline Flow SSA Analysis - Average Density
Appendix E Baseline Flow SSA Analysis - Maximum Density
Appendix F Baseline + Pumping Station Flow SSA Analysis - Maximum Density
Appendix G Force Main Sizing Check
Appendix H Wet Well, Force Main, Pump Sizing, and Pump Curve
List of Figures and Tables
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map .......................................................................................................... 1
Figure 2 – Trenton Sewer Basin and Total Contributing Area ................................................ 2
Figure 3 – Contributing Area ................................................................................................. 3
Figure 4 – Perry Ave Sanitary Service Basin NE Riddell Road to E 18th Bypass .................. 5
Figure 5 – MH#2 Zoning ....................................................................................................... 6
Figure 6 – MH#12 Zoning ..................................................................................................... 7
Figure 7 – MH#13 Zoning ..................................................................................................... 7
Figure 8 – MH#14 Zoning ..................................................................................................... 8
Figure 9 – MH#15 Zoning ..................................................................................................... 8
Figure 10 – MH#16 Zoning ................................................................................................... 8
Figure 11 – MH#17 Zoning ................................................................................................... 9
Figure 12 – MH#18 Zoning ................................................................................................... 9
Figure 13 – MH#19 Zoning ................................................................................................... 9
Figure 14 – MH#20 Zoning ................................................................................................. 10
Figure 15 – MH#21 Zoning ................................................................................................. 10
Figure 16 – Bremerton GC Zone Density ............................................................................ 11
Figure 17 – Route 1 – Plan & Profile ................................................................................... 14
Figure 18 – Route 2 – Plan & Profile ................................................................................... 15
Figure 19 – Route 3 – Plan & Profile ................................................................................... 16
Figure 20 – Route 4 – Plan & Profile ................................................................................... 17
Table 1 – Proposed Pumping Station Flows by Area and Density ......................................... 4
Table 2 – Baseline Flows .................................................................................................... 12
Table 3 – Summary of Results ............................................................................................ 18
Table 4 – Force Main Pipe Size .......................................................................................... 19
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 1 9/12/2023
I. INTRODUCTION
As discussed in pre-submittal conference between the property owners and the City of Bremerton
(City), the proposed project is to include an approximately 189 lot subdivision. A summary of the
topics discussed has been recorded in Pre-Submittal Report BP21 00148 (BP148). The full report
is provided in Appendix A.
BP148 states a study and report are required before the City can make a determination about the
sanitary sewer utility availability. As requested in BP148 page 3, this report addresses the
following topics:
Contributing Area
Pump Station Sizing
Sanitary Sewer Capacity Perry Avenue
This report has been prepared to provide the City with the background and information to make
the determination about the sanitary sewer utility availability.
II. PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed project is located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area but has not been
annexed into the City of Bremerton and remains in unincorporated Kitsap County (County). This
area is known as the Enetai neighborhood, just northeast of the city boundary of the City of
Bremerton, overlooking Port Orchard (the water body) to the east, and bounded by the following
streets: Hillside Drive NE, NE 30th Street and NE Enetai Beach Road, see Figure 1.
Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 2 9/12/2023
III. PROPOSED DESIGN FLOWS
BP148 defines the contributing area as follows: provide a graphic showing the maximum
contribution area that the pump station will provide service for, including low pressure sewer
systems serving properties to the east and downslope.
A. Contributing Area
The contributing area of the proposed project includes areas served by gravity sanitary
sewer and low-pressure sewer systems. Per the 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan
Update (Comp Plan), the project area is within the Trenton Avenue Sewer Basin service
area TRT-1. Per a request from the City of Bremerton Engineering Department (see
Appendix B), the gravity portion of the proposed service area has been requested to also
include the adjacent areas within TRT-2, TRT-3, and TRT-4 that will flow by gravity to the
proposed project Pumping Station location. The low-pressure areas were determined by
estimating the capabilities of E-One individual pumping stations that will generally allow
up to 100 feet of lift with approximately ¼ mile of pressure pipe from the proposed pumping
station. The total area of the contributing area boundary is 105.0 acres. The Trenton
Sewer Basin and contributing area boundary are shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2 – Trenton Sewer Basin and Total Contributing Area
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 3 9/12/2023
The final contributing area has been reduced by excluding certain critical areas and
community roads. Steep or un-buildable slopes (generally 30% or greater) were
determined by the Kitsap GIS website and include erosion and landslide hazards. The
critical areas within the contributing area total 54.0 acres. This remaining area has been
further broken down into the current Zoning by Kitsap County, 55.1 acres is within the
Kitsap Urban Restricted Zone (UR) and 33.0 acres are within the Kitsap Urban Low Zone
(UL), see Figure 3.
Figure 3 – Contributing Area
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 4 9/12/2023
B. Proposed Design Flows
The proposed sanitary pumping station will convey wastewater from the proposed
pumping station and the adjacent properties within the contributing area as described in
Section III-A above. For the remainder of this analysis and report, full build-out conditions
have been assumed on all contributing adjacent properties, while the proposed plat
assumes the proposed number of dwelling units. The number of design dwelling units
were then used to calculate average daily flow and peak design flow per the Criteria for
Sewage Works Design, August 2008 (Orange Book). The calculations are based on the
following assumptions: estimated flow of 71 gallons per person per day (gpd/person), an
average of 2.4 people per dwelling unit (DU), and a peaking factor of 4. The calculations
and results have been provided in Table 1 below with the Peak Design Flow at 247 gallons
per minute (gpm).
Table 1 – Proposed Pumping Station Flows by Area and Density
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 5 9/12/2023
IV. BASELINE DATA
Upon request by Team 4 Engineering, City engineering staff provided the Perry Avenue sanitary
sewer service basin from NE Riddell Rd to the East 18th St bypass. Team 4 has expanded this
general service area by further dividing the area by City/County Zoning (see Figure 4 below).
Figure 4 – Perry Ave Sanitary Service Basin NE Riddell Road to E 18 th Bypass
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 6 9/12/2023
Based on the contributing area and dwelling unit density of each zone in the basin, the proposed
design flows have been estimated at the minimum, average, and maximum densities. The
densities were then used to calculate average daily demand, maximum daily demand, and peak
hourly demand. Figures 5 – 16 provide a detailed view of each service area and the receiving
manhole.
C. Baseline Service Areas and Flows
The sewer service basin to MH#2 at NE 30th Street and Perry Avenue and the zone are
shown in Figure 5 below.
Figure 5 – MH#2 Zoning
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 7 9/12/2023
The sewer service basin to MH#12 at Sheridan Rd and Perry Avenue and the zone are
shown in Figure 6 below.
Figure 6 – MH#12 Zoning
The sewer service basin to MH#13 located north of NE Fruitland Street and Perry Avenue
and the zone are shown in Figure 7 below.
Figure 7 – MH#13 Zoning
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 8 9/12/2023
The sewer service basin to MH#14 at Sunset Lane and Perry Avenue and the zone are
shown in Figure 8 below.
Figure 8 – MH#14 Zoning
The sewer service basin to MH#15 located north of NE Stone Way and Perry Avenue and
the zone are shown in Figure 9 below.
Figure 9 – MH#15 Zoning
The sewer service basin to MH#16 at NE Stone Way and Perry Avenue and the zone are
shown in Figure 10 below.
Figure 10 – MH#16 Zoning
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 9 9/12/2023
The sewer service basin to MH#17 located east of Fir Court at Perry Avenue and the zone
are shown in Figure 11 below.
Figure 11 – MH#17 Zoning
The sewer service basin to MH#18 at Holman Street and Perry Avenue and the zone are
shown in Figure 12 below.
Figure 12 – MH#18 Zoning
The sewer service basin to MH#19 at Parker Place and Perry Avenue and the zone are
shown in Figure 13 below.
Figure 13 – MH#19 Zoning
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 10 9/12/2023
The sewer service basin to MH#20 at Cascade Trail and Perry Avenue and the zone are
shown in Figure 14 below.
Figure 14 – MH#20 Zoning
The sewer service basin to MH#21 at E 18th Street and Perry Avenue and the zone are
shown in Figure 15 below.
Figure 15 – MH#21 Zoning
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 11 9/12/2023
D. Baseline Flow Data
Based on the contributing area and dwelling unit density of each zone in the basin, the
proposed design flows have been estimated at the minimum, average, and maximum
densities. The densities were then used to calculate average daily demand, maximum
daily demand, and peak hourly demand per the Orange Book.
The Department of Ecology approximates Infiltration and Inflow (I&I) via a peaking factor
and a flow value of 100 gallons per day per person. The City of Bremerton states an
average flow value of 71 gallons per day per person from the 2014 Wastewater
Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project has utilized the City of Bremerton’s sewer
flow rate in conjunction with the peaking factor, with the understanding from City staff that
I&I will be drastically reduced in this sewer basin via City cure-in-place-pipe (CIPP)
methods as well as a small number of existing sewer connections upstream of the force
main connection point.
The calculations are based on the following assumptions: estimated flow of 71 gallons per
person per day (gpd/person), an average of 2.4 people per dwelling unit (DU), and a
peaking factor of 4.
Bremerton General Commercial (GC) Zone
The City of Bremerton requires the GC Zone density to be based on the estimated number
of people rather than the number of dwelling units per acre. The narrative below provides
justification to match the Bremerton GC Zone to the County Zoning min/max densities.
The zone includes the Perry Avenue Mall and surrounding area (see Figure 16
below). The zone includes an area of 10.5 acres and currently has 470 parking spaces
surrounding nine single, and one two story building. The buildings are mixed use including
a gas station, grocery store, barber shop, retail, and office space.
Figure 16 – Bremerton GC Zone Density
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 12 9/12/2023
At the Kitsap County GC min density of 10 DU/acre = 252 people (= 10 DU/acre x 10.5
acres x 2.4 people/DU). Assuming 1.6 people per vehicle and a 1/3 full lot, the number of
people would be 251 (= 1.6 x 470 spaces x 1/3 full). At the Kitsap County GC max density
of 30 DU/acre = 756 people (= 30 DU/acre x 10.5 acres x 2.4 people/DU). Assuming 1.6
people per vehicle and a full lot, the number of people would be 752 (= 1.6 x 470 spaces).
Therefore, we have estimated the City GC densities of 10 and 30 DU/acre are reasonable
for the proposed analysis which match the Kitsap County GC densities.
Existing Dwelling Units
The existing dwelling units have been estimated in each zone to gain a general
understanding of the current density in each zone. In each Zone area, as shown in Figures
5 – 15, the dwelling units were counted based on the June 2022 imagery of Google Earth.
Baseline Flows
Using the zone areas, the minimum, average, and maximum densities, and calculations;
the baseline results are a minimum flow of 696 gpm, an average flow of 1,126 gpm, and
a maximum flow of 1,556 gpm. The existing dwelling unit data, at an estimated 596 gpm,
indicates the total baseline area is less than the anticipated flows at minimum density.
The full data has been provided in Table 2 below.
Table 2 – Baseline Flows
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 13 9/12/2023
E. SSA Model of Baseline Data
The minimum, average, and maximum baseline data was input into AutoCAD Storm and
Sanitary Analysis 2021 (SSA) software. This serves as the baseline model to which the
proposed contributing area flows have been added for analysis in Section VI of this report.
Baseline at Minimum Flows
The SSA model at minimum baseline flows does not show any pipes at capacity or any
surcharges within the analyzed system. See Appendix C for the full analysis.
Baseline at Average Flows
The SSA model at maximum baseline flows show the pipes between MH#2 to MH#1A and
MH#1 to MH#12 are at capacity. All other pipes within the system are under capacity.
See Appendix D for the full analysis.
Baseline at Maximum Flows
The SSA model at maximum baseline flows show the pipes between MH#2 to MH#1A and
MH#1 to MH#12 are at capacity. The analysis also shows a slight surcharge of the pipe
between MH#1A to MH#1, which is slightly over the 8-in pipe depth at 0.67 feet. All other
pipes within the system are under capacity. See Appendix E for the full analysis.
F. Recommended Baseline Flows
As shown in Table 2 and described in Section IV-C, the estimated existing flow conditions
for the system are well below the baseline flows at minimum density. Although, for the
remainder of this analysis and report, we recommend using the baseline flow at maximum
density data. This provides a worst-case scenario of the baseline area under current
zones conditions.
V. FORCE MAIN ROUTE ALTERNATIVES
BP148 guided the design team to connect to the City sanitary sewer system along Perry Avenue.
We have laid out four proposed force main routes. The proposed connection points have been
identified as follows:
1. NE 30th Street & Perry Avenue
2. NE Fruitland Street & Perry Avenue
3. NE Stone Way & Perry Avenue
4. Cascade Trail & Perry Avenue
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 14 9/12/2023
A. Route 1: NE 30th Street & Perry Avenue
This proposed force main route will pump sanitary sewage north through the proposed
plat then west along NE 30th Street to Perry Avenue (see Figure 17 below). The existing
sanitary sewer pipe at this location 8-in PVC.
Figure 17 – Route 1 - Plan & Profile
The pros and cons of this route include:
Pros
The route travels through public right of ways.
The total static elevation change is 204 feet.
Cons
The existing sanitary sewer pipe at the proposed connection point 8-in PVC, which
is already at capacity under the maximum baseline scenario.
The route is 4,920 feet long.
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 15 9/12/2023
B. Route 2: NE Fruitland Street & Perry Avenue
This proposed force main route will pump sanitary sewage west through the proposed plat
then west along NE Helm and NE Fruitland Streets to Perry Avenue (see Figure 18 below).
Figure 18 – Route 2 - Plan & Profile
The pros and cons of this route include:
Pros
The existing sanitary sewer pipe at the proposed connection point 12-in concrete.
The route is 3,960 feet long (shortest route).
The route travels through public right of ways.
The total static elevation change is 169 feet (lowest).
The route has adequate capacity at maximum baseline data.
This route is also the proposed watermain route to connect the subdivision to
Trenton Ave.
Cons
N/A
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 16 9/12/2023
C. Route 3: NE Stone Way & Perry Avenue
This proposed force main route will pump sanitary sewage southwest through the
proposed plat then south along NE Enetai Beach Road and west to NE Stone Way and
Perry Avenue (see Figure 19 below).
Figure 19 – Route 3 - Plan & Profile
The pros and cons of this route include:
Pros
The existing sanitary sewer pipe at the proposed connection point 15-in concrete.
The route is 4,320 feet long.
Cons
The route travels through many private parcels.
The route goes through a deep ravine which complicates maintenance.
The total static elevation change is 225 feet.
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 17 9/12/2023
D. Route 4: Cascade Trail & Perry Avenue
This proposed force main route will pump sanitary sewage southwest through the
proposed plat then south along NE Enetai Beach Road and west along Cascade Trail and
Cascade View to Cascade Trail and Perry Avenue (see Figure 20 below).
Figure 20 – Route 4 - Plan & Profile
The pros and cons of this route include:
Pros
The existing sanitary sewer pipe at the proposed connection point 15-in concrete.
Cons
The route is 6,850 feet long.
The route travels through many private parcels.
The route goes through a deep ravine which complicates maintenance.
The total static elevation change is 265 feet.
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 18 9/12/2023
E. Recommended Force Main Route
Based on the pros and cons of each route, Routes 3 and 4 are eliminated for consideration
due to the deep ravine. Routes 1 and 2 are both technically feasible. Comparing Routes
1 and 2, Route 2 is shorter by almost 1000 feet, has a lower static elevation change by 35
feet, and the connection point is into a 12-inch pipe rather than an 8-inch pipe. Both the
length and the static elevation differences combine to require a smaller pump in the
proposed pumping station. Therefore, Route 2 is the recommended alternative and will
be used in the analysis in Section VI below.
VI. PERRY AVENUE SANITARY SEWER CAPACITY ANALYSIS
BP148 defines the sewer capacity analysis as follows: the capacity of the Perry Avenue sanitary
sewer main will be analyzed; potential upsizing may be required.
A. Proposed Pumping Station Design Flows at Maximum Denisty
In Section III of this report, the proposed subdivision pumping station design flows were
analyzed. The worst-case baseline flows were recommended to be at maximum density.
B. Baseline Flows at Maximum Denisty
In Section IV of this report, the baseline flows were analyzed. The worst-case baseline
flows were recommended to be at maximum density.
C. Baseline and Pumping Station Flows at Maximum Denisty
Since the pumping station flows at maximum density were added to the baseline system
at MH#13 (per Route #2), the upper section of the baseline analysis remains unchanged.
The SSA model at maximum baseline plus the maximum pumping station flows show all
pipes downstream of the connection point (MH#13 at NE Fruitland St and Perry Avenue)
are under capacity. See Appendix F for the full analysis and a summary of the results is
provided in Table 3 below.
Table 3 – Summary of Results
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 19 9/12/2023
VII. PUMP STATION SIZING
BP148 defines the pump station to be sized as follows: the proposed pump station shall be sized
for this contribution area and will dictate sizing for the wet well, force main pipe, and the electrical
service while the pumps can be initially sized for the current development only.
A. Wet Well
The final wet well size is dependent on the peak hourly demand for the contributing area.
In general, based on the largest peak hourly demand (i.e. the maximum density per Table
1) and the recommended force main route (Route 2), the proposed wet well is anticipated
to be approximately 10-feet in depth and 8-foot diameter with a 3.3-foot depth for an
operating volume of approximately 1241 gallons. See Appendix G for the full analysis.
Due to the remote location of this pump station, it is anticipated the final design will be
using a portable engine generator for back up service. Per the Orange Book, this scenario
recommends an overflow capacity of a minimum of one hour at peak flow conditions.
Under the preliminary wet well sizing, 15,000 gallons of overflow storage is recommended.
B. Electrical Service
The required electrical service is anticipated to be 3-phase power.
C. Force Main Pipe Size
The force main pipe size is based on the selected force main route and the peak hourly
demand for the contributing area. Based on the peak design flow (per Table 1), the
recommended Route 2, and the force main pipe size is estimated to be 6-inches in
diameter. See Table 4 below. A minimum flow required to achieve 2 ft/s in the 6-inch
diameter force main is 176 gpm.
Table 4 – Force Main Pipe Size
As a general check of the calculated force main size, we compared the friction losses in
various pipe diameters to estimate the approximate optimal size force main required. At
the peak design flow, recommended Route 2, and nominal pipe sizes; the total head for a
4-inch pipe is 130 ft, a 6-inch pipe is 18 ft, and an 8-inch pipe is 4 ft (see Appendix G). A
higher the dynamic head loss increases the size of the required pump. In this case, a 4-
inch dynamic head loss of 130 ft is very high, a 6-inch of 18 ft is moderate, and 4 ft is very
low. Therefore, a nominal 6-inch force main is appropriately sized.
Enetai - Fisher Plat Sanitary Sewer Feasibility Report
Team4 Engineering Page 20 9/12/2023
D. Pump Sizing
The submersible pump is initially sized to meet the proposed development only and the
minimum flow rate to meet a minimum of 2.5 ft/s in the force main pipe. Setting the initial
target parameters at 250 gpm at a duty point of 200 ft of total dynamic head with the static
head at 169 ft, there are four pumps that were selected for further review. Of the four
proposed pumps, we recommend a Flygt 1330S-4X.263.S78.230 30Hp, three phase, 230-
volt pump. The performance duty point of the recommended pump is 250 gpm at 200 ft
of total head at 45.5% efficiency. See Appendix H for the full analysis and pump curve.
VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Through this report, we conclude that the Perry Avenue baseline area and downstream of MH#13
near NE Fruitland Street and Perry Avenue have the capacity to add the proposed Fisher Plat
subdivision sanitary sewer flows. Therefore, we request a sanitary sewer utility availability letter
from the City.
APPENDIX A
Presubmittal Report – BP21 00148
Page 1 of 4
Department of Community Development
345 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, WA 98337-1873
Telephone: 360-473-5289
Fax: 360-473-5278
_______________________________________________________________________________
PRE-SUBMITTAL REPORT – BP21 00148
Distribution: Mark Kuhlman mark@team4eng.com
John Fisher john@fisherohana.com
It is our understanding that you are proposing the annexation of property located adjacent to
Hillside Drive (parcel # 072402-2-107-2007) in the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area, and
once annexation in completed to subdivide that property. Based on your proposal, the following
is a summary of the major points discussed at the pre-application meeting held Wednesday,
October 6, 2021, and follow up meeting held January 18, 2022.
Land Use:
1. ANNEXATION. The City requires annexation prior to providing an application for
subdivision. The property owner will have to petition the City in order to begin the
annexation process. You should plan an approximate minimum time of six to eight month
to complete annexation. Annexation approval is a City Council decision. To learn more
about annexation, please visit our City webpage:
http://www.ci.bremerton.wa.us/170/Annexation.
UGA CONNECTING TO CITY SEWER
ANNEXATION REQUEST EXEMPTION
Applicant sends request to join annexation effort to all property owners within the
geographical area identified at the end of this report. Please provide a draft of the proposed
notice to the City for concurrence prior to mailing.
Results feasible to create geographical
area supporting 10% or greater
Result not near 10%
Petition City Council for annexation.
Form attached, at which point staff will
further engage. See attached flowchart.
Proceed with annexation exemption process.
2. ZONING. If annexed, the proposed subdivision would be located in the Low Density
Residential (R-10) zone per BMC 20.60.
3. SUBDIVISION. Subdivisions of 10 or more lots are considered a Formal Subdivision per
BMC 20.12.080(b) and requires a Type III Hearings Examiner decision. Division of land
will be processed per BMC 20.12 and BMC 20.60.065. All survey materials must be
prepared by a qualified professional. Each of the listed permits must be completed in the
following order:
i. Preliminary Formal Subdivision (Type III Hearings Examiner Decision)
ii. Site Development Permit (Type I Administrative Decision)
iii. Final Subdivision (Type I Administrative Decision)
iv. Building Permits for individual homes (Type I Administrative Decision)
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix A: 1 of 8
Presubmittal Report – BP21 00148
Page 2 of 4
4. RESIDENTIAL CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT (RCD). As critical areas are found onsite,
the applicant may want to consider a RCD, which is a specialty type of subdivision
regulated per BMC 20.58.060. By setting aside certain areas for open space, including any
unbuildable critical areas, additional flexibility is provided to the applicant in terms of
setbacks, parking configurations, and townhomes are permitted with RCDs.
5. CRITICAL AREAS.
• CATEGORY I CRITICAL AQUIFER. Per Kitsap County Critical Areas maps, the
site contains critical aquifers. A Hydrogeological Assessment consistent with BMC
20.14.440 is required with the submittal for subdivision.
• GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS. Per Kitsap County Critical Areas maps,
highly geologically hazardous areas exist onsite. Any proposed subdivision would
need to conform to standards found in BMC 20.14.600, including providing a report
from a geotechnical engineer. BMC 20.14.660(h), third-party geotechnical review of
the applicants submitted report may be required to protect public health, safety and
welfare; it is not known at this time if third-party review would be required.
• STREAMS. Per Kitsap County Critical Areas maps, the site contains non-fish bearings
streams. Please coordinate early with the Washington State Department of Fish &
Wildlife (DFW) to ensure this stream typing is appropriate. It has been common DFW
to change the type of such streams which could increase buffers and effect project
configuration; early coordination could help avoid substantial revisions.
6. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.
To contact the Land Use Division call Garrett Jackson
(360) 473-5279, or email Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Building Department:
1. An accessible route shall be provided within the site to and from the sidewalks, public
streets, public transportation stops, accessible parking, accessible loading zones and
accessible building entrances. The accessible route shall be provided by means of
walkways, sidewalks and ramps that will comply with A117.1 Accessible and Usable
Buildings and Facilities. The slope and cross slope of the finished elevations of all
walkways, sidewalks, and ramps that are required and intended to be used as part of the
accessible route shall comply with a cross slope of not more than 2% and the slope of a
walkway or ramp shall comply with the standards for accessibility.
To contact the Building Department call Stuart Anderson the main at (360) 473-5270
or email Stuart.Anderson@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Front yard setback 15 feet Development Coverage 60 percent
Side Yard Setback 5 feet Maximum Driveway Width 20 feet
Rear Yard Setback 15 feet Minimum Driveway Width 8 feet
Maximum Height 35 feet Parking 2 spaces per unit
BMC 20.48.060(a) Driveways and areas used for loading, parking and maneuvering motorized vehic les
shall have a paved surface.
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix A: 2 of 8
Presubmittal Report – BP21 00148
Page 3 of 4
Engineering Department:
1. Due to the nature of this project, no Utility Availability Letter was sent to the applicant
and instead a letter describing the required sewer infrastructure improvements necessary to
serve this Project was delivered, followed by a meeting between the City and the
applicant. The proposed pump station location presented was agreed upon.
From this meeting the following items will need to be addressed with further coordination
between the applicant and the City:
a. A graphic showing the maximum contributing area that the pump station will
provide service for, including low pressure sewer systems serving properties to the
east and downslope.
b. Pump station shall be sized for this contribution area and will dictate sizing for the
wet well, force main pipe, and the electrical service while pumps can be sized for
the current development.
c. Perry Ave. sewer main capacity is a concern and will need to be analyzed;
potential upsizing may be required.
2. Project transportation design and aspects should be designed to City of Bremerton
Standards if the plat in Kitsap County will dedicate the roads as public due to the potential
of the City taking ownership of these roads if this area were to annex in the future. The
City is less inclined to accept ownership of roads platted as private within the UGA if this
area is ever annexed. Water design and aspects shall be governed by North Perry Water
District.
3. City of Bremerton will comment on the need for a Traffic Impact Analysis during the
project’s SEPA comment period with Kitsap County permit submittal.
4. Annexation process will be coordinated between the applicant, Public Works & Utilities,
and Department of Community Development.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT – Staff Contact: Robert Endsley, (360) 473-2348 or
Robert.Endsley@ci.bremerton.wa.us or call the main office at (360) 473-5270.
Fire Department:
1. No comments at this time.
To contact the Bremerton Fire Marshal's office: (360) 473-5386 or
Michael.Six@ci.bremerton.wa.us
These comments are based on information provided prior to and at the pre-submittal meeting.
The pre-submittal application conference is not intended to be an exhaustive review of all
potential issues and the discussions shall not be binding or prohibit the enforcement of applicable
laws. If you have any further questions, please contact the individual departments or the
Department of Community Developments main line at (360) 473-5275.
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix A: 3 of 8
Presubmittal Report – BP21 00148
Page 4 of 4
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix A: 4 of 8
Annexation Process – Petition Method
There are eight methods of annexation available for the City of Bremerton to utilize.
The likely method that could be used in the annexation of territory in SKIA would be
the “Petition Method.” This would require a petition of the owners of at least 60 per-
cent of the assessed property value in the area to agree to petition to the city. In brief,
diagrammed below are the steps that would be followed if a petition is submitted from
the property owners for the City’s consideration. Please see the following pages for a
written discussion of the process.
PETITION SUBMITTED
(Only 10% of owners required)
COUNCIL MEETING WITH
PETITIONERS
Reject—Accept—Modify Proposal
ACCEPT/MODIFY?
Initiating party must gather
signatures from 60% of owners
SUBMISSION OF 60%
PETITION
BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD
Reviews proposal
REJECT?
No further action
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC MEETING
Pass ordinance for effective date of
annexation
PETITION REVIEWED FOR
LEGAL SUFFICIENCY BY COUNTY
ASSESSOR
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
Council passes resolution showing
intent to annex
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix A: 5 of 8
________________________________________________________________________________
Public Works & Utilities │ 345 6th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 * Phone (360) 473-5920 * Fax (360) 473-5398
Working for and with our residents to establish Bremerton as Puget Sound’s most beautiful and livable waterfront city!
November 16, 2021
Attn: FISHER JOHN C & EPP SHAWNA L
6964 WING POINT RD NE
BAINBRIDGE ISLAND WA, 98110-2986
Re: Fisher Plat – BP21 00148
Mr. Fisher,
The City of Bremerton Department of Public Works & Utilities – Engineering has
reviewed the submittal package for the Fisher Residential Plat for the
presubmittal permit BP21 00148 for the meeting held on October 20, 2021. The
Department has also reviewed the contents of the email from Mark Kulhman
sent on October 25, 2021.
In response to the presubmittal meeting and the email correspondence, City
staff are reluctant to draft a Conditional Utility Availability Letter for the project
for the following reasons:
• There is no close or feasible sewer infrastructure available.
• The current 2021-2026 Capital Improvement Program (Six year CIP) does
not account for any of the sewer improvements required for the Project as
listed in the City’s 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan (WWCP). The
2014 WWCP has been attached for reference.
The Developer has the option to explore the route of providing sewer service via
septic systems in accordance with Kitsap Public Health District’s requirements. If
the Developer would like to pursue City sewer service, then the following
improvements and alternatives with estimated dollar amounts are available per
the 2014 WWCP, and will need to be funded and constructed fully by the
Developer:
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix A: 6 of 8
________________________________________________________________________________
Public Works & Utilities │ 345 6th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 * Phone (360) 473-5920 * Fax (360) 473-5398
Working for and with our residents to establish Bremerton as Puget Sound’s most beautiful and livable waterfront city!
Alternative #1
CIP ID# and Description
Infrastructure
Improvements Details
Estimated
Cost with
Prevailing
Wages
NS-5C:
Construct pump station TA-3 at along
low point of NE Enetai Beach Rd. to
convey sewer flow from sub-basin TRT-1.
Additionally, install force main along NE
Enetai Beach Rd. and Holman St. to
convey flow to Perry Ave.
• 3,300-gallon wet
well with capacity
of 900-gpm at
230-ft TDH
• 3,900-ft of 8-in
force main
$ 6.00
million
NS-5E
Construct gravity sewer from 30th St.
along NE Enetai Beach Rd. to proposed
pump station TA-3 and along Holman St.
from Trenton Ave. to NE Enetai Beach
Rd.
• 4,200-ft of 8-in
gravity sewer
$ 1.63
million
Alternative #2
CIP ID# and Description
Infrastructure
Improvements Details
Estimated
Cost with
Prevailing
Wages
NS-5B (Partial):
Construct pump station TA-2 in the
vicinity of NE Helm St. and Trenton Ave.
to convey sewer flow from sub-basins
TRT-4,5, and 6. Wet well to be sized for
full buildout conditions with pumps sized
for current contribution flows.
Additionally, install force main along
Sheridan Rd. to discharge into Cherry
Ave. Basin in the vicinity of Schley Blvd.
• 5,000-gallon wet
well with capacity
of 1,350-gpm at
210-ft TDH
• 3,900-ft of 10-in
force main
$ 9.48
million
(This
includes
gravity
sewer
costs not
required)
Project-Specific Pump Station
Construct pump station to convey sewer
flow for the proposed development.
Install force main from project pump
station to pump station TA-2.
• Wet well to be
sized for
development
• Force main sized
for development
N/A
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix A: 7 of 8
________________________________________________________________________________
Public Works & Utilities │ 345 6th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 * Phone (360) 473-5920 * Fax (360) 473-5398
Working for and with our residents to establish Bremerton as Puget Sound’s most beautiful and livable waterfront city!
Right-of-way acquisition, obtaining easements for access and utilities, obtaining
permits from the applicable jurisdictions for both permitting and construction shall
be the responsibility of the Developer. All sewer infrastructure shall adhere to the
City of Bremerton Engineering Standards and shall adhere to the Bremerton
Municipal Code.
If you would like to explore this further please feel free to reach out to me for
discussion or to set up a follow up meeting.
Sincerely,
Robert Endsley
City of Bremerton, Engineering Division
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix A: 8 of 8
APPENDIX B
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix B: 1 of 2Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix B: 1 of 2
City Exhibit
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix B: 2 of 2
APPENDIX C
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix C: 1 of 1
APPENDIX D
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix D: 1 of 1
APPENDIX E
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix E: 1 of 1
APPENDIX F
APPENDIX G
Force Main Sizing Check
Problem:determine the total head loss, system curve, and pump curves
Given:Input Fields in Blue/Highlighted
Assume:maximum flow
Solution:
Head Loss - using Hazen-Williams formula with various flows
HL=(10.44)*L*Q1.85/(Ch
1.85*d4.8655)
LS fittings Equiv. Length of Pipe
4"6"8"
(pump)
90 Elbow 10.1 15.2 20
90 Elbow 10.1 15.2 20
Check Valve 33.6 50.5 33.3
Gate Valve 2.4 3.5 4.5
90 Elbow 10.1 15.2 20
Tee 20.1 30.3 39.9
Gate Valve 2.4 3.5 4.5
Meter 2.4 3.5 4.5
(force main)
91.2 136.9 146.7
Original
Length of
Pipe =3960
Total L(ft) =4096.9
Input Fields
Upper
Range
of
Output
Table
Static Head
(ft)
L (ft) Q (gpm) Ch Nominal ID
(in)
169 4096.9 250 150 4
6
L= length (ft)8
Q=flow (gpm)
Ch= roughness coefficient
d=pipe inside diameter (in)
1 of 3
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix G: 1 of 3
Force Main Sizing Check
System Curves for various size force mains
Output Fields
Q (gpm)
Dynamic
HL (ft)
Static
HL (ft)
Total HL
(ft)
0 0.00 169 169.00
25 1.83 169 170.83
50 6.59 169 175.59
75 13.96 169 182.96
100 23.77 169 192.77
125 35.92 169 204.92
150 50.33 169 219.33
175 66.94 169 235.94
200 85.70 169 254.70
225 106.56 169 275.56
250 129.50 169 298.50
Nomimal ID (in)4
Output Fields
Q (gpm)
Dynamic
HL (ft)
Static
HL (ft)
Total HL
(ft)
0 0.00 169 169.00
25 0.25 169 169.25
50 0.92 169 169.92
75 1.94 169 170.94
100 3.31 169 172.31
125 5.00 169 174.00
150 7.00 169 176.00
175 9.31 169 178.31
200 11.92 169 180.92
225 14.82 169 183.82
250 18.01 169 187.01
Nominal ID (in)6
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 100 200 300Head (ft)Flow (gpm)
Design System Curve
168
170
172
174
176
178
180
182
184
186
188
0 100 200 300Head (ft)Flow (gpm)
Design System Curve
2 of 3
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix G: 2 of 3
Force Main Sizing Check
Output Fields
Q (gpm)
Dynamic
HL (ft)
Static
HL (ft)
Total HL
(ft)
0 0.00 169 169.00
25 0.06 169 169.06
50 0.23 169 169.23
75 0.48 169 169.48
100 0.82 169 169.82
125 1.23 169 170.23
150 1.73 169 170.73
175 2.30 169 171.30
200 2.94 169 171.94
225 3.66 169 172.66
250 4.44 169 173.44
Nomimal id (in)8
169
169
170
170
171
171
172
172
173
173
174
174
0 100 200 300Head (ft)Flow (gpm)
Design System Curve
3 of 3
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix G: 3 of 3
APPENDIX H
Problem:determine the total head loss, system curve, and pump curves
Given:Input Fields in Blue/Highlighted, Calculated values in Red
Assume:Peak flow
Solution:
Head Loss - using Hazen-Williams formula with various flows
HL=(10.44)*L*Q1.85/(Ch
1.85*d4.8655)
LS fittings Equiv. Length of Pipe*
4"6"8"
(pump)
90 Elbow 10.1 15.2 20
90 Elbow 10.1 15.2 20
Check Valve 33.6 50.5 33.3
Gate Valve (open)2.4 3.5 4.5
90 Elbow 10.1 15.2 20
Tee 20.1 30.3 39.9
Gate Valve (open)2.4 3.5 4.5
Meter 2.4 3.5 4.5
(force main)
91.2 136.9 146.7
Original Length of Pipe =3960
Total L(ft) =4096.9
* Source =
IPS - Pipe Size OD Size Wall Thickness Pressure / Rating Ave. ID
4" 4.500 0.409 SDR 11, 160 psi 3.682
4" 4.500 0.265 SDR 17, 100 psi 3.970
6" 6.625 0.602 SDR 11, 160 psi 5.421
6" 6.625 0.390 SDR 17, 100 psi 5.845
8" 8.625 0.784 SDR 11, 160 psi 7.057
8" 8.625 0.507 SDR 17, 100 psi 7.611
10" 10.750 0.997 SDR 11, 160 psi 8.756
10" 10.750 0.632 SDR 17, 100 psi 9.486
Input Fields
Upper Range
of Output
Table
Static Head (ft) L (ft) Q (gpm)
Ch id (in)
169 4096.9 400 150 5.421
L= length (ft)6"
Q=flow (gpm)SDR 11, 160 psi
Ch= roughness coefficient
d=pipe inside diameter (in)
Handbook of PVC Pipe Design & Construction
Table 9.1 and Figure 9.2
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 1 of 9
System Curve
Output Fields
Q (gpm) Dynamic HL (ft)Static HL (ft)Total HL (ft)
0 0.00 169 169.00
40 0.99 169 169.99
80 3.58 169 172.58
120 7.59 169 176.59
160 12.92 169 181.92
200 19.53 169 188.53
240 27.36 169 196.36
280 36.39 169 205.39
320 46.59 169 215.59
360 57.93 169 226.93
400 70.39 169 239.39
Pump Curve - Input Data from manufacturers Literature
Pump:Flygt 1330S-4X.263.S78.230
30 Hp three phase, 230 volt
x-axis y-axis Crv 2 x-axis
Q (gpm) Total Head (ft) Q (gpm)
1.0 249.0 2.0
150.0 220.0 300.0
250.0 200.0 500.0
350.0 178.0 700.0
Input Fields
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 100 200 300 400 500
Design System Curve
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 200 400 600 800
Pump Curve
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 2 of 9
System & Pump Curve - Pump Data from manufacturers Literature
Input Fields
Upper Range
of Output
Table
Static Head (ft) L (ft) Q (gpm)
Ch id (in)
169 4096.9 400 150 5.421
Pump:Flygt 1330S-4X.263.S78.230
30 Hp three phase, 230 volt
Pipe:6" SDR 11, 160 psi
Velocity: Note:
Single Pump Optimum Flow 250 gpm Flow needed to maintain
(from above curves)3.0 ft / s
Velocity =3.48 ft / s 216 gpm
Dual Pumps Optimum Flow 325 gpm
(from above curves)
Velocity =4.52 ft / s
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800Head Loss (ft)Flow (gpm)
System & Pump Curve
System Curve Pump 2 Pump 1
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 3 of 9
Pump Station Sizing Fisher Plat 12-Sep-23
Design Criteria
Septage Flows
Peak Flow 247 gpm
Average Daily Flow 62 gpm
Lift Station
Target Operating Volume
Operating Volume (V) = t x Q / 4 per Orange Book
V = 625 gal
where:
Time Between Starts (t)10 min per City staff
Pump Output Flow (1 pump) (Q)250 gpm
Design Wet Well Sizing
Diameter - I.D.8 ft per City staff
Operating Depth 3.3 ft
Operating Volume 1241 gal exceeds target volume
Pump Data (1 pump)Lead Pump only
Pump Output Flow (1 pump)250 gpm
Pump Run Time
w/o inlet flow 5.0 min
Combined Pump Data (2 pumps)Lead + Lag Pumps
Pump Output Flow 325 gpm
Pump Run Time
w/o inlet flow 3.8 min
Peak Hour Flow Rate Lead Pump only
Peak Flow 247 gpm
Pump Run Time
w/ inlet flows 446.6 min
LS Fill Time 5.02 min
Pump Run Frequency 6.01 runs / hr
Average Daily Flow Rate Lead Pump only
Average Daily Flow 62 gpm
Pump Run Time
w/ inlet flows 6.6 min
LS Fill Time 20.08 min
Pump Frequency 2.40 runs / hr
Two Pumps Running at Peak Flow Rate Lead + Lag Pumps
Peak Flow 247 gpm
Pump Run Time
w/ inlet flows 16.0 min
LS Fill Time 5.02 min
Pump Frequency 2.86 runs / hr
One cycle every 21.0 min
0.35 hr
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 4 of 9
69.0 - 5/15/2023 (Build 33)
Program version Data vers ion
8/23/2023 9:00 A8P8
Us er group(s )
Xylem: USA - EXT
S ubmersible pumps for sewage and surface wa ter within municipal
and commercial building a pplications. Non-clog im pellers a re
desig ned to m aintain reliable performance a t susta ined efficiency .
Head
S78 192mm
65.8%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
[ft]
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 [US g.p.m.]
1 3 3 0 S-4 X.2 6 3 .S7 8.2 3 0
192 mm
Numbe r of blade s
2
T echnic a l s pec ifica tion
Wet well k it
C onfigur at ion
4 inch
Impelle r diame te r
192 mm
Disch arge diameter
4 inc h
Moto r numbe r Installation type
K1330.181 25-18-2Z A-W 30hp
Inle t diame te r
Maximum ope rating
spe ed3540 rpm
Mat e rials
Grey cast iron
Stator housing mate rial
Curv es according to:
Pum p inform at ion
Disch arge diameter
Impelle r diame te r
Impelle r
Grey cast iron
W ater, pure [100%],39.2 °F ,62.43 lb/ft³,1.6888E-5 ft²/s
Curv e: ISO 9906
Nomi nal (mean) data shown. Under- and over-performance from this data shoul d
be expected due to standard manufacturi ng tolerances.
Please consult your local Flygt representative for performance guarantees.
0
Xy lect-21129287 9/13/2023Last update
Create d on 9/13/2023
M att RasmussonCreated byProject
Block
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 5 of 9
69.0 - 5/15/2023 (Build 33)
Program version Data vers ion
8/23/2023 9:00 A8P8
Us er group(s )
Xylem: USA - EXT
1 3 3 0 S-4 X.2 6 3 .S7 8.2 3 0
T echnic a l s pec ifica tion
Mot or - Ge ne r al
Freque ncy Rate d voltage
Rate d pow erRated spee d
Rate d current
230 V
30 hp3540 rpm
67 A
3~K1330.181 25-18-2Z A-W 30hp
Phases
Total moment of inertia
1.6 lb ft²
Power factor - 1/1 Load
0.90
0.86
0.78
91.6 %
92.1 %
91.6 %
Moto r numbe r
ATEX approved
60 Hz
Numbe r of pole s
2
Stator variant
9
Insulation class
F
Type of D uty
Mot or - Te chnical
Power factor - 3/4 Load
Power factor - 1/2 Load
Moto r e fficie ncy - 1 /1 Load
Moto r e fficie ncy - 3 /4 Load
Moto r e fficie ncy - 1 /2 Load
Starting curre nt, direct starting
Starting curre nt, star-de lta
585 A
195 A
S 1
Starts per hour max.
15
No
0
Xy lect-21129287 9/13/2023Last update
Create d on 9/13/2023
M att RasmussonCreated byProject
Block
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 6 of 9
69.0 - 5/15/2023 (Build 33)
Program version Data vers ion
8/23/2023 9:00 A8P8
Us er group(s )
Xylem: USA - EXT
1 3 3 0 S-4 X.2 6 3 .S7 8.2 3 0
Performance curve
Dut y point
200 ft250 US g.p.m.
He adFlow
Curv es a ccording to:
Head
Efficiency
Overall Efficiency
Power input P1
Shaft power P2
S78 192mm
65.8%
200 ft
48.3 %
44.2 %
26.2 hp
250 US g.p.m.
28.6 hp
250 US g.p.m.
S78 192mm
200 ft
48.3 %
44.2 %
26.2 hp
250 US g.p.m.
28.6 hp
250 US g.p.m.
S78 192mm
200 ft
48.3 %
44.2 %
26.2 hp
250 US g.p.m.
28.6 hp
250 US g.p.m.
S78 192mm (P2)
200 ft
48.3 %
44.2 %
26.2 hp
250 US g.p.m.
28.6 hp
250 US g.p.m.
S78 192mm (P1)
200 ft
48.3 %
44.2 %
26.2 hp
250 US g.p.m.
28.6 hp
250 US g.p.m.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
[ft]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
[%]
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
32
[hp]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 [US g.p.m.]
W ater, pure [100%],39.2 °F ,62.43 lb/ft³,1.6888E-5 ft²/s
Curve: ISO 9906Nominal (mean) data shown. Under- and over-performance from this data should be expected due to standard manufacturing tolerances.
Please consult your local Flygt repres entative for performance guarantees.
0
Xy lect-21129287 9/13/2023Last update
Cre ate d on 9/13/2023
M att RasmussonCreated byProject
Block
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 7 of 9
69.0 - 5/15/2023 (Build 33)
Program version Data vers ion
8/23/2023 9:00 A8P8
Us er group(s )
Xylem: USA - EXT
Pumps /Flow He ad Shaft powe r Flow He ad Shaft powe r Hydr.e ff.Specific NPSHre
Sys te ms Ene rgy
1 250 US g.p.m.200 ft 26.2 hp 250 US g.p.m.200 ft 26.2 hp 48.3 %1420 k Wh/US M G
1 3 3 0 S-4 X.2 6 3 .S7 8.2 3 0
Duty Anal ys i s
Curv es a ccording to:W ater, pure [100%] ; 39.2°F ; 62.43lb/ft³; 1.6888E-5ft²/s
Head
S78 192mm
65.8%
200 f t
250 US g.p.m.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
220
230
240
250
[f t]
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 [US g.p.m.]
O pe r at ing char act e rist ics
Nominal (mean) data shown. Under- and over-performance from this data should be expected due to standard manufacturing toler ances.
Please consult your local Flyg t representative for performance guarantees.
Xy lect-21129287
9/13/2023Last update
Create d on 9/13/2023
M att RasmussonCreated byProject
Block
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 8 of 9
69.0 - 5/15/2023 (Build 33)
Program version Data vers ion
8/23/2023 9:00 A8P8
Us er group(s )
Xylem: USA - EXT
1 3 3 0 S-4 X.2 6 3 .S7 8.2 3 0
Di mens ional dra wi ng
34516Ø4"
Weight Pump Stand
lbs 613 117Outlet center lineRef. line
Scale Date
RevisionDrawing number
S uction
inlet
P ump inlet
P ump outlet
Discharge
outletKP1330SHNon-clog
Wet-well
Ø4"
Ø4"1:20 190827
8179000 3
183
433
8
49
16
153491612582" Guide bars
213
16
77831516913
16
41"
301
8
81
16
811681164151611
16
213
16 41316913
16
3078Z-Z
Z Z
0
Xy lect-21129287
9/13/2023Last updateCreated on 9/13/2023
M att RasmussonCreated byProject
Block
Enetai - Fisher Plat: Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis Appendix H: 9 of 9
Page 1 of 5
Outside Utilities Agreement
Rev. 09/2021
Return Address: City Clerk
City of Bremerton
345 Sixth Street, Suite 100
Bremerton, WA 98337
AUDITOR/RECORDER’S INDEXING FORM
Document Title(s): 1. Outside Utilities Agreement
Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: N/A
Grantor(s): 1.
Additional names on page of document.
Grantee(s): 1. The City of Bremerton
Additional names on page of document.
Legal Description:
(abbreviated)
Additional legal is on page of document.
Assessor’s Property Tax Parcel/Account Number:
Project Name:
OUTSIDE UTILITIES AGREEMENT
WHEREAS the Bremerton Municipal Code requires property outside the city boundaries to
support annexation to the City of Bremerton as a condition for receiving City utilities (BMC
15.02.040 and 15.03.040); and
WHEREAS the City of Bremerton has a primary obligation to its citizens to allocate limited
service resources for adequate growth and development within the City; and
Page 2 of 5
Outside Utilities Agreement
Rev. 09/2021
WHEREAS the undersigned, as owner of a parcel outside the City of Bremerton, has made
application for city utilities;
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned owner (hereinafter "Owner") of real property located
in Bremerton, Kitsap County, Washington, (hereinafter "Property"), legally described as:
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A
and the City of Bremerton (hereinafter "City"), in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth
herein including the furnishing of utility services by the City of Bremerton, do hereby promise and
agree as follows:
1. Services Provided. City of Bremerton shall provide utility services consistent with
service areas defined by the City comprehensive utility plans as amended, and terms and conditions
of a current Letter of Availability from the Bremerton Utilities Department.
2. Rates and Charges. Owner shall pay when due all connection charges, assessments,
and rates established for city utility services by City ordinance for the Owner's user class.
3. Use. Development of the property described above shall comply with the uses and
development standards of City of Bremerton comprehensive land use plan adopted pursuant to RCW
35.13.177 and any adopted subdivision and street standards of the City of Bremerton.
4. Utility Improvements.
5. Annexation. Owner, by signing below, grants to the City of Bremerton a Limited
Power of Attorney to include this Agreement as Owner's consent to the annexation of the Property as
part of any Notice of Intent or Petition for Annexation presented to the City of Bremerton.
The annexation petition supported by this Power may include proportional assumption of the
City indebtedness by the area to be annexed. The petition shall require the concurrent adoption of
land uses designated in any urban fringe comprehensive plan approved for the annexation area
pursuant to RCW 35.13.177, or if none has been adopted, the land uses for annexed property as set
forth in the Bremerton Zoning Code as amended.
This Power of Attorney is nonrevocable.
Page 3 of 5
Outside Utilities Agreement
Rev. 09/2021
6. Enforcement. Violation of this Agreement may result in the immediate termination
of utility services to the above-described property as well as other remedies provided by law.
7. Covenants. The undersigned further agrees that this Agreement and the promise made
herein constitute a covenant running with the land and shall be binding upon the undersigned and his
heirs, successors, and assigns, and that this Agreement shall be filed for record in the office of the
Kitsap County Auditor.
OWNER(S):
DATED: BY:
Owner
BY:
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss
COUNTY OF KITSAP )
On this day, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,
personally appeared ____________________________________________________, to me known
to be the individual(s) described in and who executed the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged that he/she/they signed the same as his/her/their free and voluntary act and deed, for
the uses and purposes therein mentioned.
GIVEN under my hand and official seal this _____ day of _____________________,
20_____.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,
residing at:
My appointment expires:
Page 4 of 5
Outside Utilities Agreement
Rev. 09/2021
CITY OF BREMERTON
DATED: BY:
Greg Wheeler, Mayor
DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL:
Thomas Knuckey
Director of Public Works and Utilities
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Kylie J. Finnell, Bremerton City Attorney
Angela Hoover, City Clerk
R:\Legal\Legal\Forms\FORMS ON COBWEB\Outside Utilities Agreement Rev. 09 2021.docx
Page 5 of 5
Outside Utilities Agreement
Rev. 09/2021
EXHIBIT A
From: Sarah Palama-Hoffer <sarahpalama@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 5:41 PM
To: Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Ned Lever <Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us>;
Thomas Knuckey <Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Fischer property sewer proposal
Hello(again),
Reading through your email I would also like clarification on your statement that reads, “if the city
decides annexation is not feasible”…….
The community has already been polled and rejected the idea of annexation. It’s not that this is “not
feasible”, it’s more than the community has overwhelmingly rejected the idea already so saying it’s “not
feasible”, is incorrect. The developer is trying to use a municipal code exception because annexation is
not an option.
Also, you said “rates will be adjusted” to pay for the cost and maintenance of this new system. By
“adjusted” do you mean “increased” for City of Bremerton residents?? So COB residents will have to pay
higher rates to cover maintenance costs for a system that doesn’t even serve COB property??!! You
stated the extension is also for the “benefit” of surrounding areas…How would this benefit any of us if
we were forced to pay into sewer because of septic failure, home renovations, etc. I doubt anyone has
large amounts of extra funding laying around for tapping into city sewer.
Hoping for clarification on these questions and the questions I emailed earlier today. Thank you.
Sarah Palama-Hoffer
On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:30 PM Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us> wrote:
Ms. Palama-Hoffer,
Please see my responses below in red. I have copied the City Council to inform them on the community
interest in this matter.
Thanks,
Janelle Hitch, P.E.
Managing Engineer – Development
Public Works & Utilities – Engineering
(360) 473-5285
Janelle.hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us
From: Sarah Palama-Hoffer <sarahpalama@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 7:16 AM
To: Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Fischer property sewer proposal
I realized after I sent my original email, my email chose to not populate the first portion of my email so I
will re-write it below. Feel free to disregard the original email I sent. Thanks so much!
Hello Janelle,
Kathie Lustig has been informing me of all of the communications she has received from you but I
would love clarification on a few more things regarding this proposal for sewer in a non annexed/ non
city maintained part of Bremerton.
1. If the city will be responsible to own and maintain this system, including pump stations and the
additional impact to the wastewater treatment plant, will this essentially fall all on the backs of
the City of Bremerton rate payers? If so, are they aware of this development attempting to get
sewer put in? The non-annexed folks using this system have to pay 50% more then City rate
payers...but where is the cost breakdown to show that this 50% surcharge is enough to cover
the costs and long term maintenance of this massive extension, pump stations, etc? I find it
troubling that as a neighborhood we have not seen any documentation regarding feasibility. Will
families paying the city tax be informed of this project?
The City will own the sewer main, sewer laterals and pump station that are proposed. Rate
studies are completed regularly and rates are adjusted to ensure adequate funding for
operation and maintenance of facilities. The rate studies evaluate the general facility charges
(GFCs) for connections to the wastewater system as well as ongoing service fees. The
Comprehensive Plans that the City utilizes are the initial documentation regarding
feasibility. The City did establish in the feasibility of serving the East Bremerton UGA in the
Comprehensive Plan.
2. How will the wet well, pumps, and overflow storage be accessed and maintained by the City. It
appears the location is in a critical area. What size will the vault be for overflow storage. In the
event of an overflow beyond the storage, how will downstream neighboring properties and the
associated downstream critical areas be impacted?
If the City Council agrees that annexation is not feasible, the location of the pump station will be
evaluated as the design progresses. The City will require an accessible pump station and sewer
main within City or County ROW or easements. Assessment of critical areas would be under the
jurisdiction of Kitsap County. To ensure adequate capacity, systems are designed with
redundancy of infrastructure. In addition, emergency power is required at all pump stations.
3. What is the annual and lifetime cost for the City of Bremerton to own, operate, and maintain
this system, whose sole purpose is to serve a single, non-annexed residential development?
How will actual City tax payers have to bear the cost for properties that aren’t paying taxes into
the City? Local City residents should in no way have to bear this cost for non-annexed property
or for a development outside of city limits. It seems the ordinance they are referring to reads as
if this is for a singular home hoping to access sewer lines already in place. Not a subdivision
seeking new piping.
These costs are not readily available. There are no anticipated costs to other tax payers with the
extension of systems through development. As was indicated above the developer pays for
design and construction of the proposed facilities. The city evaluates and adjusts the GFCs and
service fees regularly to cover the costs of operation and maintenance. The proposed system is
being designed to accommodate not only the proposed subdivision but also surrounding area
taking into account the larger plan of serving the entire East Bremerton UGA. The City will
require any new system that is built to meet current design standard.
4. How does this sewer extension benefit the City? Why hasn’t the developer explored septic and
reduced the number of lots to achieve minimum density? Extending sewer to a non-annexed
development appears to be the last solution after all others have been explored and their report
is not reading that way considering it was written so recently by the same firm that is working
with the developer to get this subdivision built.
UGAs are intended to support urban growth and density and require systems to support
that. Extension of sewer support the UGA growth. The City has taken into account the zoning of
the UGA when anticipating the capacity of the proposed system. An assessment of capacity for
the City’s entire system, both existing and yet unserved areas is completed with each
Comprehensive Plan.
5. If accessing sewer was not feasible in 2021 per the documentation supplied to Kathie, why is the
city even entertaining this idea for the developer. If anything, the pricing he was given for the 2
other options has certainly inflated.
Please clarify your question.
As I am sure you know, we are on a massive time crunch so a prompt reply would be greatly appreciated
Sarah Palama-Hoffer
2753 hillside dr ne
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 5:20 PM Sarah Palama-Hoffer <sarahpalama@gmail.com> wrote:
Kathie Lustig has been informing me of all of the communications she has received from you but I
would love clarification on a few more things regarding this proposal for sewer in a non annexed/ non
city maintained part of Bremerton.
1. If the city will be responsible to own and maintain this system, including pump stations and the
additional impact to the wastewater treatment plant, will this essentially fall all on the backs of the City
of Bremerton rate payers? If so, are they aware of this development attempting to get sewer put in? The
non-annexed folks using this system have to pay 50% more then City rate payers...but where is the cost
breakdown to show that this 50% surcharge is enough to cover the costs and long term maintenance of
this massive extension, pump stations, etc? I find it troubling that as a neighborhood we have not seen
any documentation regarding feasibility. Will families paying the city tax be informed of this project?
2. How will the wet well, pumps, and overflow storage be accessed and maintained by the City.
It appears the location is in a critical area. What size will the vault be for overflow storage. In the
event of an overflow beyond the storage, how will downstream neighboring properties and the
associated downstream critical areas be impacted?
3. What is the annual and lifetime cost for the City of Bremerton to own, operate, and maintain
this system, whose sole purpose is to serve a single, non-annexed residential development?
How will actual City tax payers have to bear the cost for properties that aren’t paying taxes into
the City? Local City residents should in no way have to bear this cost for non-annexed property
or for a development outside of city limits. It seems the ordinance they are referring to reads as
if this is for a singular home hoping to access sewer lines already in place. Not a subdivision
seeking new piping.
3. How does this sewer extension benefit the City? Why hasn’t the developer explored septic
and reduced the number of lots to achieve minimum density? Extending sewer to a non-
annexed development appears to be the last solution after all others have been explored and
their report is not reading that way considering it was written so recently by the same firm that is
working with the developer to get this subdivision built.
4. If accessing sewer was not feasible in 2021 per the documentation supplied to Kathie, why is
the city even entertaining this idea for the developer. If anything, the pricing he was given for the
2 other options has certainly inflated.
As I am sure you know, we are on a massive time crunch so a prompt reply would be greatly appreciated
Sarah Palama-Hoffer
2753 hillside dr ne
From: kathie.lustig@icloud.com <kathie.lustig@icloud.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 1:50 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: KWalters@kitsap.gov; APresson@kitsap.gov
Subject: Public Comment: Extension of Sewer to Fisher Plat in UGB 10/11 and 10/18
Dear Bremerton City Council,
I am contacting you about the Developer’s Request to Extend City Sewer outside the sitting of
Bremerton but within the UGB (urban growth boundary) that you will be discussing at a study session on
October 11th. I have read the published packet and pages 154-164 (A-5) generated by the Bremerton
Public Works & Development Department
My name is Kathie Lustig and I am a resident of Kitsap County residing in the area of Rozewood Estates
accessed via Trenton Ave. I have been active in our neighborhood as a community organizer around
issues related to opening up ROW at the end of our subdivision, as well as brought to light the
misleading annexation attempt made by Team4Engineering for their client and developer, Mark Fisher.
See attached letter that went out to a select group of residents about annexation in March 2022. This
language was approval by the City planning department. The letter failed to disclose the true purpose
of the inquiry, which was their client to get his property annexed to the City so he could get sewer
hookup to maximize density and profits for his proposed subdivision of 200+ houses.
The City’s Public Works Department Memo dated Sept 15th to City Council fails to accurately represent
the significant public outcry that occurred when this annexation attempt occurred when residents found
the real purpose behind the annexation attempt. It was overwhelmingly rejected my residents by
approximately 99.9%. The annexation attempt failed. The memo lists ONE person under public
comments and misrepresents the shear number of people opposed to this.
Team4Engineering then moved towards circumventing the will of the people by submitting a pre-
submittal permit BP21 00148 requesting a Conditional Utility Availability. The City issued a letter dated
November 16, 2021 (see attached) that determined there is "no close or feasible sewer infrastructure
available.” Options were given to pursue city sewer at the sole cost of the developer. The developers
analysis appears to have rejected those options and chose their own. Those options are before the City
Council to review. Keep in mind, the cost to developer to construct a sewer line, will not just be the
developers burden. It will be passed on to residents whom will be forced to hookup to it when our
septics failed and ultimately residents of the City of Bremerton. Their preference to use Helm/Fruitland
from Perry Avenue to bring sewer to their proposed development does not consider, among other
things, the critical habitat of Enetai Creek that State Fish & Wildlife lists as having salmon that would be
dug up and disturbed by the proposed sewer line. These environmental impacts should be a
consideration by the City Council BEFORE it approves sewer hookup.
Albeit the County DCD would review other permitting related to this potential development, the City
Council cannot turn a blind eye to Critical Areas and animal habitat on this parcel. Development of this
parcel at such high density will have devastating impact to wildlife and all the residents surrounding it.
The traffic alone will overwhelm our neighborhoods due to its location that is at a dead end. This is not
an appropriate location for a high density subdivision of this type that sits at a dead end. The developer
intends to discharge run off from the developemnt into the Puget Sound waters. It is well known the
area consists of significant geological hazards and prone to soil instability. Recent earthquake research
data put a fault line just to the north in Illahee that shows the location at extreme risk of slide and
upheaval. It simply is not safe to have so many homes on such unstable ground and discharge run off in
such a manner.
Washington State mandates how annexation is handled to protect the rights of the citizens and to
keep it a democratic one (RCW Ch. 35.13). Information about what has transpired between
Team4Engineering, the developer Mark Fisher and the Department of Public Works, Utilities and
Engineering has been held behind a veil of secrecy to the public and particularly from the residents
whom are impacted by the City agreeing to allow a wastewater utility service. My attempts to
communicate to city council members about this matter have been ignored. The public has not been
allowed to have any input into this process and it appears that “City Council may, in it’s sole and
absolute discretion, provide wastewater utility services to properties outside the city limits if certain
conditions are met.” "Certain conditions' don't appear to include public comment or opinion.
The public has been given 7-days notice of this review and decision making by the City Council. Is the
City Council going to protect the rights of its citizens or use its sole authority and absolute discretion to
circumvent the will and the rights of the people for one developer? We at a minimum should be allowed
to have more input and time to review the developers sewer analysis. I sincerely hope the City Council
will give this thorough review and take into consideration that no resident in the surrounding
neighborhood wants this. To ignore our opinions, and move forward with an approval is not what I call a
democratic process and certainly will not be protecting the rights to all of its citizens.
I appreciate you taking the time to consider my thoughts and opinions, many that are shared by the
overwhelming majority of residents around me. The entire Rozewood Estates neighborhood, as well as
the subdivision to the north of 30th adjacent are against this. Many down at Enetai Beach community
oppose it as well. I implore the City Council to deny this request for utility hookup. The request is
premature and should not be considered until all SEPA review is done related to proposed sewer line(s)
options.
Sincerely,
Kathie Lustig
Community Organizer
2811 Rozewood Drive
From: Garrett Jackson <Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: City of Bremerton, Pending Enetai Utility Service Request
Date: October 3, 2023 at 4:57:19 PM PDT
To: Garrett Jackson <Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Greg Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>, City Council
<City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>, Andrea Spencer <Andrea.Spencer@ci.bremerton.wa.us>,
Thomas Knuckey <Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>, Ned Lever
<Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us>, Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Interested Citizen - I’m sending you this message because you have shared your contact information
with me as an interested party related to annexation and extension of utilities in the Enetai area and
there is a pending action that you may be interested in knowing more about. Please see the information
below
BACKGROUND: In 2022 a property owner in the Enetai area spoke with staff at the City of Bremerton
regarding the potential to either annex their property into the City or the potential to connect to the city
sewer without annexation. Enetai is located within an Urban Growth Area (UGA), and with this
designation it is anticipated that the area will annex to the City at some point in time. In addition to the
area being within Bremerton’s UGA, Enetai is also in the City’s sewer service area. It is the general policy
of the City of Bremerton that properties located outside the City limits annex into the City before sewer
utility services are extended outside of City limits. However, the City’s adopted policies allow the City
Council to review proposals for extension of sewer without annexation if it is infeasible to annex.
ANNEXATION FEASIBILITY: The property owner in Enetai engaged in a public outreach process in the
Spring of 2022 (?) to determine if neighboring properties were interested in joining them in annexation,
and during that process they were unable to gain enough support to make annexation feasible. Having
shown that no other individuals wanted to join their annexation bid, the property owner is now seeking
to obtain sewer service from the City without annexation and is following the process outlined in the
City’s regulations under Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC 15.03.040(b)).
SEWER EXTENSION WITHOUT ANNEXATION: Following the demonstration that annexation is infeasible
a property owner can obtain sewer service if it can be demonstrated that providing sewer service to the
properties is technically possible and the City Council agrees to approve the extension without
annexation. Since the Spring of 2022 the property owner and the City Engineering Division have been
analyzing whether providing sewer service to their property was feasible, and it has been determined
that it is possible to provide sewer service to their property. The property owner has now submitted
a formal request to the Bremerton City Council to approve extension of sewer service without
annexation, and the City Council will soon be reviewing the applicant’s request.
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL PROCESS & DECISION: The City Council is expected to discuss the proposed
extension of utilities without annexation at a Study Session next Wednesday October 11th , with a formal
decision potentially anticipated at the regular City Council meeting on Wednesday October 18th . Please
note that all Council meetings are open to the public and conducted in a hybrid format that allows
attendees to participate either in-person or by zoom. The Council study sessions (in this case October
11) are for the Council to receive information from staff regarding proposals. At study sessions there are
no decisions made by the Council and there is also not an opportunity for public comment. The City
Council will be encouraging public comments at their October 18th regular meeting regarding this
request for extension of sewer service.
BREMERTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION & CONTACT: The City Council staff updates the
Council webpage with all meeting information, please see their webpage here for
updates::https://meetings.municode.com/PublishPage/index?cid=BREM&ppid=d33416d7-25d1-44e6-
9d32-55b97fa53824&p=-1 . The meeting packets are typically first published the Friday before the
meetings, so check that link to obtain the meeting packet information. If you would like to provide
public comment to the City Council please use the following email City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us .
BREMERTON ENGINEERING CONTACT: If you have questions about proposed sewer service, please
contact Manager of Development Engineering Janelle Hitch, 360-473-
5285, Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us.
DEVELOPMENT PERMITTING - KITSAP COUNTY DCD: Please note, the proposal before the Bremerton
City Council is limited to a sewer extension request. The City of Bremerton is not the permitting
authority for this potential development, it is within the jurisdiction of Kitsap County. If you have
questions about the development application status you can contact Kitsap County Community
Development at: 360-337-5777, email help@kitsap1.com.
Garrett Jackson
Planning Manager
(360) 473 - 5289
Mailing Address: 345 6th Street, Suite 100
Physical Address: 345 6th Street, Suite 600
Bremerton, WA 98337
________________________________________________________________________________
Public Works & Utilities │ 345 6th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 * Phone (360) 473-5920 * Fax (360) 473-5398
Working for and with our residents to establish Bremerton as Puget Sound’s most beautiful and livable waterfront city!
November 16, 2021
Attn: FISHER JOHN C & EPP SHAWNA L
6964 WING POINT RD NE
BAINBRIDGE ISLAND WA, 98110-2986
Re: Fisher Plat – BP21 00148
Mr. Fisher,
The City of Bremerton Department of Public Works & Utilities – Engineering has
reviewed the submittal package for the Fisher Residential Plat for the
presubmittal permit BP21 00148 for the meeting held on October 20, 2021. The
Department has also reviewed the contents of the email from Mark Kulhman
sent on October 25, 2021.
In response to the presubmittal meeting and the email correspondence, City
staff are reluctant to draft a Conditional Utility Availability Letter for the project
for the following reasons:
• There is no close or feasible sewer infrastructure available.
• The current 2021-2026 Capital Improvement Program (Six year CIP) does
not account for any of the sewer improvements required for the Project as
listed in the City’s 2014 Wastewater Comprehensive Plan (WWCP). The
2014 WWCP has been attached for reference.
The Developer has the option to explore the route of providing sewer service via
septic systems in accordance with Kitsap Public Health District’s requirements. If
the Developer would like to pursue City sewer service, then the following
improvements and alternatives with estimated dollar amounts are available per
the 2014 WWCP, and will need to be funded and constructed fully by the
Developer:
________________________________________________________________________________
Public Works & Utilities │ 345 6th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 * Phone (360) 473-5920 * Fax (360) 473-5398
Working for and with our residents to establish Bremerton as Puget Sound’s most beautiful and livable waterfront city!
Alternative #1
CIP ID# and Description
Infrastructure
Improvements Details
Estimated
Cost with
Prevailing
Wages
NS-5C:
Construct pump station TA-3 at along
low point of NE Enetai Beach Rd. to
convey sewer flow from sub-basin TRT-1.
Additionally, install force main along NE
Enetai Beach Rd. and Holman St. to
convey flow to Perry Ave.
• 3,300-gallon wet
well with capacity
of 900-gpm at
230-ft TDH
• 3,900-ft of 8-in
force main
$ 6.00
million
NS-5E
Construct gravity sewer from 30th St.
along NE Enetai Beach Rd. to proposed
pump station TA-3 and along Holman St.
from Trenton Ave. to NE Enetai Beach
Rd.
• 4,200-ft of 8-in
gravity sewer
$ 1.63
million
Alternative #2
CIP ID# and Description
Infrastructure
Improvements Details
Estimated
Cost with
Prevailing
Wages
NS-5B (Partial):
Construct pump station TA-2 in the
vicinity of NE Helm St. and Trenton Ave.
to convey sewer flow from sub-basins
TRT-4,5, and 6. Wet well to be sized for
full buildout conditions with pumps sized
for current contribution flows.
Additionally, install force main along
Sheridan Rd. to discharge into Cherry
Ave. Basin in the vicinity of Schley Blvd.
• 5,000-gallon wet
well with capacity
of 1,350-gpm at
210-ft TDH
• 3,900-ft of 10-in
force main
$ 9.48
million
(This
includes
gravity
sewer
costs not
required)
Project-Specific Pump Station
Construct pump station to convey sewer
flow for the proposed development.
Install force main from project pump
station to pump station TA-2.
• Wet well to be
sized for
development
• Force main sized
for development
N/A
________________________________________________________________________________
Public Works & Utilities │ 345 6th Street Suite 100 Bremerton, WA 98337 * Phone (360) 473-5920 * Fax (360) 473-5398
Working for and with our residents to establish Bremerton as Puget Sound’s most beautiful and livable waterfront city!
Right-of-way acquisition, obtaining easements for access and utilities, obtaining
permits from the applicable jurisdictions for both permitting and construction shall
be the responsibility of the Developer. All sewer infrastructure shall adhere to the
City of Bremerton Engineering Standards and shall adhere to the Bremerton
Municipal Code.
If you would like to explore this further please feel free to reach out to me for
discussion or to set up a follow up meeting.
Sincerely,
Robert Endsley
City of Bremerton, Engineering Division
Robert Endsley
Digitally signed by Robert Endsley
DN: C=US,
E=Robert.Endsley@ci.bremerton.wa.us,
O=City of Bremerton, OU=Public Works &
Utilities, CN=Robert Endsley
Date: 2021.11.16 10:47:34-08'00'
From: Meredith Sobolesky <meredithsobolesky@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 9:57 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Concerns for Sewer Extension Request
Mr. Jeff Coughlin,
I am a resident of the Manette area and it was recently brought to my attention that the city council will
be reviewing a service request for sewer hookup by Mark Fisher in regards to his proposed 200+
subdivision development. I had a few concerns as a city resident to allow a non city development use
and access to city utilities.
1. What are the environmental impacts of a proposed sewer extension of this magnitude to areas such
as Enetai Creek?
2. If such a connection would be approved, who would own the sewer line installed by the developer?
3. Who would maintain the portion of the sewer line including the pump stations required?
4. How would impacts to the current City of Bremerton wastewater treatment plant be impacted by
allowing such a utility hookup?
5. What information was used determining the feasibility of providing the sewer service to the property?
6. How will this impact current City of Bremerton residents in the future for taxes funds, and staff
required to maintain non annexed properties?
Thank you for representing Manette.
Sincerely,
Meredith Sobolesky
From: John & Kathy Park <jkpark506@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 12:44 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Please listen to those most impacted
I will start by saying I was born in Bremerton in
the mid 40s and have lived here my whole life. My
family home was off Trenton Avenue and now I live
in NW E Bremerton.
I have heard about this possible development and
I have a friend who lives off Keel on the edge of
this property.
When several homes were built in the early 2000s
at the end of Keel off Hillside Drive the water run
off issues negatively impacted homes on the N side
of Keel. I can see more issues should this acreage
be allowed to move forward.
These small residential streets weren't meant for
lots of traffic.
The impact on wildlife will be devastating. "We"
are taking down their homes and pushing them
into neighborhoods because there is no place for
them to go.
I have driven up 30th and looked at the property.
So many trees would be lost.
There would have to be so much fill in areas to
make it even accessible let alone viable for building
homes.
PLEASE - look at this proposal and the property
involved and think of the residents around
it. There are other properties better suited for this
type of development.
Thank you for your time.
From: Robin Smith <moet2@comcast.net>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 7:27 PM
To: KWalters@kitsap.gov
Cc: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Proposed Fisher Development
Hello- My message is regarding developer John Fisher and his
pursuit of putting 200 homes on 50 acres of forested land
bordering 30th Ave, east of Trenton, the east border of Rozewood
Estates and the community of Enetai Beach. My home and property
are adjacent to the Fisher acreage.I consider myself a steward
of my property. I feel that at present there is an abundance of
housing being built in this county.The parcel in question here
is home to a significant amount of wildlife. I see deer, eagles,
hawks daily from my house. In March of 2022, I received a letter
about annexing into the City of Bremerton sent out by Mr
Fisher's engineers (Team4Engineers).I feel that this letter was
not transparent regarding their true goal. Regardless, they
didn't break any laws and I believe that this is, in general,
how large developers conduct themselves. I do realize that money
talks and the government runs on tax dollars. My hope is that
our Kitsap County government values our ever shrinking forested
habitat and sees fit to not let every square inch of it be
destroyed.This isn't a case of "not in my backyard". My backyard
just happens to be an important part of the habitat and
ecosystem that makes Kitsap County and Washington State one of
the most wonderful places in the world.
Sincerely- Robin Smith
From: Carly Rhaburn <carly@gracepointkitsap.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 8:40 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Enetai
To Whom It May Concern,
My name is Carly Rhaburn and I am the Children's Ministry Director of GracePoint Church in Bremerton,
WA. I've lived here almost my entire life--32 years now. My father is a retired homicide detective from
the Kitsap County Sheriff's Department. I've lived here long enough to see scores of trees that
majestically lined our landscape cut down to build walmarts, starbucks', what it seems like a billion
walgreens...
������ The last 15, I've resided in Enetai off of 30th across from a beautiful parcel of cherished
forest-land of old-growth trees that houses an incredible amount of wildlife, as it's a destination for deer
coming from the Illahee Preserve.
A developer from Bainbridge Island is pushing to squeeze 200 houses into this small piece of land by
circumventing the wishes of everyone who lives around it, and the many people who enjoy walking this
very loved block.
I have 3 small children and the more traffic coming through this road is already worrisome, and now this
would completely change the landscape and safety of where we live.
Someone once told me "class" was when you know when to say "no" to something; the wisdom to know
when to preserve and when to pursue, whether it comes to fashion, architecture, or any decision, really.
When will Bremerton have the class to say enough is enough, and preserve the beauty we have?
This just makes me so sad and I wish that there could be a willingness to discuss the cons to this, and
make sure this is the right thing to do.
I'm sure the people wanting to build this a) wouldn't want to live there themselves b) wouldn't want
someone cutting down a forest of trees to build 200 tiny cookie cutter homes across from where they
live c) be forced to hookup to sewer if they don't want to
�������
My neighbors and I just don't know what to do to have our voices heard.
Thanks for your time.
Carly Rhaburn
Carly@gracepointkitsap.com
360-550-5652
From: Anita <poodlegirl1961@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 3:40 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Fisher Development bordering E. 30th East Bremerton
Please DO NOT permit this development.
Access roads cannot support this development.
With 200 additional homes (with 2-car garages, and on-street parking) there will be at a minimum 400
additional vehicles traveling E. 30th street (Main entrance of development) on a daily basis. There are no
bike lanes or sidewalks to support this development on any of the roads servicing this development, and
all roads are just 2-lane roads – one lane each direction. E. 30th has a steep incline to the immediate
west of the entrance of this proposed development which also limits visibility – so another safety
concern when accessing the proposed site.
The nearest Kitsap Transit bus stop (serviced only on weekdays – 3 times a day to Bremerton
Transportation Center, 6 times a day to Wheaton Way Transit Center) is located approximately 1 mile
away.
Unless the Developer (Fisher) is willing to upgrade the public road system for vehicular, bicycle and
pedestrian traffic to support this additional burden please do not allow this development.
Also, forcing the public to purchase a sewer hookup (if needed) from a private entity (Fisher) does not
appear to be within the scope of the city’s comprehensive plan
Please do not push this decision off on Kitsap County to correct your error AFTER you greenlight this
project. This would be a waste of taxpayer time and dollars as county residents will not support this
action.
Signed,
Anita Banks, Impacted Resident of Kitsap County
Sent from Mail for Windows
From: Judy McDonald <judymc90@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 10:29 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Fwd: Fisher Plat service extension
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Judy McDonald <judymc90@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 5:26 PM
Subject: Fisher Plat service extension
To: <citycouncil@ci.bremerton.wa>
Dear City Council members,
Please consider the uniqueness of the Fisher Plat property that will be destroyed by approving the
extension of wastewater service. This area has deep ravines, old growth trees, Enetai Creek and its own
population of wild life.
Don’t look at this strictly from a financial position but instead consider the loss of this natural asset to
the community. Please visit the property yourself to see how approval the proposed extension will
impact both people and animals. Vote for keeping this area natural versus having it become another
housing development.
Sincerely,
Judy McDonald
Manette
From: Larry Beal <beallarry@comcast.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 9:08 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Sewer Line Extension
Dear Bremerton City Council,
We are very concerned about a proposal by a developer to extend city sewer up to a parcel
directly across the street from our home on the corner of NE 30th and Hillside Drive. My
understanding is that the purpose of the request before the City Council will allow for the
developer to ultimately seek to build 200 homes on the acreage of untouched heavily wooded
land that we view daily from the front window of our home.
Please don’t approve the request from the developer to put in a city connected sewer system.
The developer would then be able to create high-density housing which would negatively affect
the traffic in
our rural area.
Please consider your decisions carefully and consciously as they have severe ramifications
further down the development line.
Thank you for your consideration,
Jill and Larry Beal
Homeowners of 40 Years at 3048 NE 30th Street
From: Tamma Farra <trfarra@colorsonsilk.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 8:18 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Proposed grant to extend sewer service to development
City Council Members,
I was alarmed to read the editorial in this mornings paper by Katy Lus�g regarding the development of a
50 acre parcel just south of Illahee State Park.
The points she made were well taken.
The public did not want this annexa�on.
As it seems to me, the developer and perhaps the City Council are set to bypass public opinion on this as
they meet today to talk about allowing sewer extension.
Please allow more �me and include the public before this decision is made.
Tamma Farra
District 3
trfarra@colorsonsilk.com
From: leenrach@juno.com <leenrach@juno.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 11:04 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: rachnlee@juno.com
Subject: Fisher Development East Bremerton
City Council Members,
I want to express my opposi�on to the 200 home development being planned for East Bremerton in the
area south of 30th street. I live on Viewcrest Drive.
1) The area in on a steep slope that has a history of sliding.
2) 200 homes is too dense of a development for the neighborhood, the roads cant support the traffic.
3) I don't want to be forced, now or in the future, to to hook up to public sewer. I just installed a new
sep�c system at great expense.
Lee Parsons
From: Rebecca Chappell <rebellen22@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 1:19 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: kathie.lustig@icloud.com
Subject: Proposed subdivision off 30th in Bremerton
I would like to express my opposition to the proposed development of the 50 acres off of 30th in
Bremerton. It appears that the city is more influenced by deep pockets than by the citizens they
represent. I feel that this subdivision does not follow the same requirements that the homeowners in
this area have to meet to build. This development seems like a case of a big builder buying their way
around the codes. They are being given a green light despite the opposition of and impact on the
existing neighborhood. The proposed density is much higher than the surrounding neighborhoods. This
new subdivision will completely destroy an untouched forest. Has there been studies done on the
effects of removing all the trees on runoff and erosion? Has the city reviewed the plans for this
development to determine if they fit, or if they will just be an eyesore and damaging to the surrounding
neighborhood? What is been done to mitigate the impact of increased traffic? This development is not a
good fit for this area!
--
Sincerely, Rebecca
From: Roberta Steen <bellagranny4@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 1:47 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject:
No way should we allow more developers to circumvent what is the best for the neighborhood over
the reach of the hunt for mighty dollar we have too many developers wanting to put more high density
apts an houses in neighborhoods that ruin the reason we settled in those areas I for one will fight it if it
gets any worse in my neighborhood
From: Judy McDonald <judymc90@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 1:45 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Fisher parcel Wildlife examples
This property is a sanctuary to many deer as well other wildlife that make this their home. Where will
they go if Bremerton assists the owner to profit from its destruction?
Judy McDonald
From: Felicienne Griffin <feliciennegriffin@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 5:28 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Public Hearing on Resolution No. 3367
I am unable to make the public hearing tonight due to illness, so I am writing in opposition to the
sewer extension to the Fisher plot. There are numerous reasons why but I wanted to address
something that the City discussed during the study session last week. A statement was made by
two people that it is not up to the city to consider what the county does, it is the city's job to approve
or disapprove the sewer connection only. I would like to point out to the council member and public
works department that this goes against your guidance.
Let me point out the Vision 2050; A plan for how and where we grow. You use this to develop the
city's comprehensive plan, and guarantees you work closely with the county and multi-county
governments for the greater good.
The plan includes a Regional Growth Strategy that focuses growth in centers and near transit, with
the goal of sustaining and creating different types of urban communities, while preserving the
region’s working resource lands and open spaces. It directs PSRC to work with others to conserve,
restore, and steward the region’s open space and natural environment.
It states the region will protect natural areas and enhance the tree canopy. It guides growth that
reduces development pressures that threaten farms, forests, and natural areas.
VISION 2050 supports the work of the Puget Sound Partnership to promote a coordinated approach
to watershed planning and restoring Puget Sound. Key strategies for helping Puget Sound include
protecting open space and restoring urban lands through redevelopment and public investment.
There is nothing about this proposed development that is low impact, will be a steward of the
environment or retain tree canopies.
The goals of this document is to protect and restore natural resources that sequester and store
carbon such as forests, farmland, wetlands, estuaries, and urban tree canopy. It also works to
protect and enhance significant open spaces, natural resources, and critical areas. If you look at
any county or state map you will see that this proposed area of development is exactly why you
should care.
Further quote: Cities have an important role in accommodating new growth and taking development
pressure off resource areas.
Per the regional open space network, we are in a parks gap (orange priority 4 and surrounded by 3).
This area hosts walking trails, promotes biking, and helps the surrounding community stay cool in
the summer, protecting us from storms, recharges our groundwater and protects endangered
wildlife.
The whole parcel is marked as Farmland of statewide importance. The only thing better than that is
the areas that would be contaminated by runoff which are marked “all areas are prime
farmland”. This land should be protected at all costs and not subjected to a developer who spends
most of their time in London.
Furthermore, in WA State Department of Commerce guidance, the quality of groundwater in an
aquifer is inextricably linked to its recharge area. Where aquifers and their recharge areas have
been studied, counties and cities should use this information as the basis for classifying and
designating critical aquifer recharge areas. This area is marked as a Critical Recharge 1, very
important for our safe, clean drinking water.
The engineer said the plot has wetlands, Commerce states Counties and cities are encouraged to
make their actions consistent with the intent and goals of “protection of wetlands," per executive
orders.
Again, cooperative and coordinated land use planning is critically important among counties and
cities in a region for preserving fish and wildlife habitat conservation is the management of land for
maintaining species in suitable habitats within their natural geographic distribution so that isolated
subpopulations are not created. You cannot become isolated in your silo.
To bring it a little closer home, the Bremerton Comprehensive Plan Environmental Chapter’s own
vision is “Protect Bremerton’s natural environment by meeting the needs of today’s citizens without
compromising the needs of future generations.” As one council member stated, the incorporation of
Enetai is inevitable. So not considering us now is not meeting the needs of future generations.
The goals of the Environment Element section are:
Stewardship: Provide stewardship by considering long-range implications of City policies on the
environment, to conduct City operations in a manner that protects the environment.
Earth: Preserve and enhance vegetation and earth resources.
Water: Protect water resources for present and future generations.
Air: Ensure compliance with good federal, state, regional, and local air quality standards through
coordinated, long-term strategies.
So what do we have and what does your plan say?
Wetlands. Wetlands help to maintain water quality; store and convey stormwater and floodwater;
recharge groundwater; provide important fish and wildlife habitat; and serve as areas for recreation,
education, scientific study and aesthetic appreciation. The City’s overall goal shall be to achieve no
net loss of wetlands.
Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas. Groundwater from aquifers provides a source of potable water and
contributes to stream discharge/flow. Critical aquifer recharge areas contribute to the recharge of
aquifers, springs and/or wells and are susceptible to contamination of water supplies through
infiltration of pollutants through the soil. City residents rely on an essential life-sustaining safe
drinking water supply.
Geologically Hazardous Areas. Regulation of geologically hazardous areas is meant to protect
human life and property from potential risks related to development on or near geologically
hazardous areas. Geologically hazardous areas include areas susceptible to erosion, sliding,
geologic events, landslides, and moderate and steep slope areas.
Priority Habitat & Species. Identification of priority habitats and species is required when evaluating
critical area sites where wetlands and/or Fish & Wildlife Conservation Areas are present.
Tree Canopy. Maintain and improve the City’s tree canopy. This combats heat islands.
On all the maps presented during a City study presented recently, I quote “they showed the
importance of keeping our resources as is.”
We recently received an annexation request as you know. In the annexation FAQ from the city of
Bremerton website, I quote “The City is conscientious of neighborhood compatibility and requires
that new development be at a similar density to the homes around it”. I share a property line with
Fisher’s development and I have a single family home on 4 acres. The others bordering him are 2-5
acres, with the smallest lots at 1/4 acre. The surrounding area is mostly sized at the 2-5 acre range
but even the smallest lots in the surrounding neighborhoods are still large enough to have their own
septic. The idea to put 189 homes on this plat would be scrutinized if the city considered their own
density fact.
Even closer to home, in an email from Janelle Hitch dated May 19, 2022 she states:
Upon receipt of a Utility Availability Request, the City will initiate the process to consider the request
for sewer extension for the proposed development.
She listed 7 criteria used in the evaluation of sewer extension. I believe the Public Works provided 5
of those in their study session last week. The two that were not discussed will need to be answered
prior to your decision. She states they are:
· Understanding of needed dedications, easements, and right-of-way for construction and
operation of the proposed system.
· Impacts to critical areas and potential mitigation requirements.
This implies that it is not up to the county or the permitting to figure it out.
I hope you vote to reject the sewer extension.
Thank you,
Felicienne Griffin and Jesse Matheson
3047 Rozewood Dr.
From: kathie.lustig@icloud.com <kathie.lustig@icloud.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 4:35 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Exhibits for Meeting / Pending Enetai Utility Service Request
Dear Bremerton City Council,
Please see documents for your review
Kathie Lustig
1 | P a g e
FISHER PLAT
PROJECT PROPOSAL / NARRATIVE
September, 2021
Name of Project:
Fisher Plat
Address of Project:
[two parcels, both with “No Situs Address” per Kitsap County Parcel GIS]
Applicant and Property Owner (per Kitsap County Parcel GIS):
FISHER JOHN C & EPP SHAWNA L
6964 WING POINT RD NE
BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WA 98110
Contacts:
Team 4 Engineering (consultant):
• Mark Kuhlman, P.E. (project manager)
5819 NE Minder Rd
Poulsbo, WA 98370
(360) 297-5560
• Timothy Witten (project coordinator, alternative contact)
(206) 858-0162
Project Location, Assessor’s Account Numbers and Legal Descriptions:
The proposed project is located in the Bremerton Urban Growth Area, but has not been
annexed into the City of Bremerton, and remains in unincorporated Kitsap County. It is located
in what is known as the Enetai neighborhood, just north of the city boundary of the City of
Bremerton, overlooking Port Orchard (the water body) to the east, and bounded by the
following streets: Hillside Drive NE, NE 30th Street and NE Enetai Beach Road.
2 | P a g e
The project will span and encompass the following two parcels:
1. Parcel 072402-2-104-2000, described as follows:
RESULTANT PARCEL A OF BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT RECORDED UNDER
AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 201605060109, RECORDS OF KITSAP COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 2 EAST,
W.M., IN KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
2. Parcel 072402-2-107-2007, described as follows:
RESULTANT PARCEL D OF BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENT RECORDED UNDER
AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 201605060109, RECORDS OF KITSAP COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, BEING A PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 2, OF SECTION 7,
TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 2 EAST, W.M., IN KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
3 | P a g e
Project Location Photographs
From the north – 30th Street
From the west – Hillside Drive
4 | P a g e
From the west – Hillside Drive
From the west – Keel Avenue
5 | P a g e
Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zone
Both parcels for the proposed project are zoned Urban Low Residential, and are situated in the
East Bremerton Urban Growth Area (see Exhibit D).
Existing and Adjacent Land Use:
Site: Currently, two parcels, totaling 36.7 acres. The site is vacant, densely forested
and the terrain is flat to rolling to steeply sloped -- up to approximately 40% in
areas.
North: ROW of 30th Street NE, across which lie approximately seven single-family house
lots, including some in Wischhoefer’s Second Addition. The area is zoned Urban
Restricted.
East: Four parcels, all vacant/undeveloped and all zoned Urban Restricted – three of
which are owned by the Pensco Trust/John Fisher IRA, and one of which is
owned by Thomas and Sharon Kubisa. The parcels range in size from
approximately 2.5-11.5 acres.
West: ROW of Hillside Drive NE (constructed) and Cheney Street (platted); Rozewood
Estates Number Three, Short Plat 7283, Short Plat No. 61, all single -family homes
and the area is zoned UL and UR.
South: One single-family house lot of approximately 5 acres in size, owned by Mark and
Jennifer Hightower. NE Enetai Beach Road runs parallel, and in close proximity,
to the shared boundary.
Project Proposal - Introduction:
The proposed project is to develop this UL-zoned property into a single-family, detached home
subdivision. At this preliminary, investigative stage – three similar, but different lot
configurations – or “options” – are being considered for development of the property into
single-family residential lots, with general conformance with Kitsap County zoning
specifications for Urban Low Residential zoning (5-9 du/ac) and City of Bremerton R-10 zone
requirements. While all three options have in common the characteristics, features and issues
discussed below in the “Topics for Discussion” portions of this proposal, the differences among
them are as follows:
Option 1: (by Map Ltd.) 166 single-family detached house lots, as depicted in Exhibit A
Option 2: (by Team 4) 189 single-family detached house lots, with a minimum width of
50 feet per lot, as depicted in Exhibit B
Option 3: (by Team 4) 189 single-family detached house lots, with a mix of 62 lots at 40
feet wide and 127 lots at 50 feet wide, as depicted in Exhibit C
6 | P a g e
In brief, the three options offer diverse balances of the variables of density, affordability,
preservation of existing landforms and habitat, and connectivity to existing neighborhood and
as follows:
Option 1 provides the lowest density and the greatest natural feature preservation, but
offers less affordable lots, a lower variety of l ot size and only minimum connectivity.
Option 2 is the most intense, but offers more desirable lots – in part because they are
almost entirely uniform in size, offers significant street connectivity, but has a lower
level of preservation.
Option 3 offers a greater variety of lot size, improves natural feature preservation to a
greater degree than Option 2, and has the highest level of street connectivity and
attendant traffic dispersal.
Project Proposal – Topics for Discussion:
1) Jurisdiction: The property is in unincorporated Kitsap County, but is in the City of
Bremerton Urban Growth Area (see Exhibit D). The City and County do not have an
Interlocal Agreement and therefore the review and approval process will be through
Kitsap County DCD with the County Zoning Ordinance and Critical Area Ordinance to be
followed unless we annex into the City.
As discussed below, sanitary sewer will be provided by the City of Bremerton. The City,
through Ordinance 5306 has revised Section 15.03.040 of the Zoning Ordinance to
require properties requesting sanitary sewer service to be annexed to the City. There is
an exemption section that will allow the City Council to extend service without
annexation if annexation appears unfeasible. We must address this with the City in
order to finalize the site plan for compliance with the appropriate Zoning Ordinance.
Therefore, we need to discuss and determine the viability of annexation in concert with
the City. The site is remote from existing city limits, but existing Power of Attorney
agreements with existing parcels may allow a successful process.
2) Utilities: The site is within the City of Bremerton Sanitary Sewer service area as stated
above. The site will need a Pump Station with a force main delivering the sewage to the
existing City system. We anticipate that the city will require the sewage to be pumped
to an existing pump station near 30th Street and Perry Avenue. We should discuss the
capacity of the City’s existing infrastructure and identify any upgrades that may be
required.
Water service will be from North Perry Water System. At this time, we do not know if
the District’s existing infrastructure is suitably sized for our additional demand. We will
coordinate with NPWS for service and any required upgrades.
7 | P a g e
We expect the development will be served by Puget Sound Energy and Cascade Natural
Gas.
3) Critical Areas: The Fisher holdings include areas not included in this development
proposal. These areas, as well as areas within the development proposal , include critical
areas such as steep slopes, streams, wetlands, and eagle trees.
We will retain a Geotechnical Engineer to identify the steep slopes to define setbacks
and work methods to allow reconfiguration of the slopes , and to define other
geotechnical design parameters. This work will address all the Fisher holdings as future
work outside of the plat boundaries will occur in or near steep slopes.
It is intended that the proposal will include the development and enhancement of the
views from the site through selective tree removal. The geotech, together with the
arborist, will define the requirements for the safety of this work.
The geotechnical analysis will determine the acceptability of our grading plan to ensure
slope stability and erosion control. Setbacks from top of slope and methodology of fill
on existing slopes will be important factors in the ultimate configuration of the lots and
associated infrastructure.
Stormwater management infrastructure and p ossibly water distribution facilities will be
built on land outside the plat boundary. The construction of these facilities will need to
comply with Geotech requirements provided in the Geotechnical Engineering Report for
the project.
We will retain a biologist to address any wetlands or streams that may exist onsite of
the plat or near the boundary of the plat as buffers may encroach onto the
development. The Biologist will need to address the Bald Eagle nests/perch trees
reported to be on the site. The Bald Eagle is no longer listed as an endangered species,
but some construction limitations may be proposed or required within 300 feet of a
nesting eagle.
4) Traffic: The project will engage a Traffic Engineer to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis
(TIA). This project will generate about 2000 end trips per day that may negatively impact
Level of Service in the surrounding road network.
The development options include varying degrees of street connectivity. We will look to
the City and/or the County to provide input on a preferred option; once that option has
been chosen, the TIA will be undertaken.
The Traffic Consultant will coordinate with the Engineering Departments at the County
and City as those agencies will review the predicted trip generation and distribution and
8 | P a g e
identify intersections for potential further study. We hope the City will share known
concerns at the Pre-Submittal Meeting.
5) Views: The desirability of lots within the development will be increased significantly if
the view potential of the site can be enhanced. Currently the view is obstructed by trees
on adjacent Fisher holdings (to the east; see figure on page 2). Therefore, tree removal
outside of plat boundaries is proposed. We hope the City can provide guidance on this
process.
6) Streets: Kitsap County and the City of Bremerton have Street Standards that define
construction of streets to be Public Right of Way streets to be maintained by the
jurisdiction. The standards do not match. The County discourages development of public
streets in residential developments; private streets are preferred to eliminate long term
maintenance expenses. On the other hand, our understanding is that the City of
Bremerton still accepts Public Streets. We will need to determine which jurisdiction will
process the application and select which standards we will adhere to. Because this area
will ultimately – if not immediately – be within the Bremerton city limits, we may choose
to use the Bremerton Street Standards so that the streets will in due course be
dedicated to, and maintained by, the City.
Please note that Map Ltd’s layout (Option 1) did not include improvements to the
Hillside ROW; it is assumed this was done to allow the neighbors to see/feel less change
by retaining a somewhat wooded strip and pedestrian path.
We consider this as an option for us, but we want to hear from the City and perhaps the
County on their preference/thoughts on the concept of street connectivity. The
Rozewood Estates plat (to the west) has dead end streets that likely expected Hillside to
be constructed and provide connectivity for emergency vehicle access and safety.
7) Stormwater Management: The stormwater management systems today require
Quantity Control and Quality Enhancement facilities to comply with state mandated
requirements. Because the Fisher holdings include waterfront, we propose to provide
quantity control by using direct discharge to the bay. The use of direct discharge will
simplify the design and construction required. This approach may require a Shoreline
Substantial Development Permit (SSDP) unless we can keep the cost of construction
within 200 feet of the shoreline below a threshold cost. We hope the City can clarify
and stipulate if the SSDP is required.
8) Process: Both the City and County include the SSDP and the Preliminary Plat as Type III
processes, meaning a public hearing is required.
9 | P a g e
Exhibits
Exhibit A – Option 1: By Map Ltd, 166 lots, 40’ x 100’
10 | P a g e
Exhibit B – Option 2: By Team 4 189 lots, 50’ x 100’
11 | P a g e
Exhibit C – Option 3: By Team 4, 189 lots, 62@40’ width and 127@50’ width
12 | P a g e
Exhibit D: Fisher property in relation to area UGAs and current City Limits
S e a r c h O p t i o n s
Pa r c e l N o
S i t e A d d r e s s
M a i l A d d r e s s
M a p S c a l e : 1 : 1 0 ,0 0 0
S h o w r e s u l t s i n a t a b l e , n o t t h e m a p .H eDisclaimerContact G I S
P a r c e l S e a r c h
Zoom In Zoom Out Full Extent Prev Extent Next Extent Pan Draw Measure Layers Results Print
+
−
Zo o m t o L o c a t i o n >
M a n a g e L a y e r s
C u r r e n t M a p T h e m e : Zo n i n g
C h o o s e A T h e m e
Wa t e r b o d i e s
B u i l d i n g s A d d r e s s e s
Zo n i n g
V i e w P r o t e c t i o n O v e r l a y
D e s i g n D i s t r i c t s
K i t s a p C o u n t y Zo n i n g D e s i g n a t i o n s
K i t s a p C o u n t y 1 9 9 8 Zo n i n g D e s i g n a t i o n s
P a r c e l s
Ta x P a r c e l s O u t l i n e s
L a y e r L i s t L e g e n d FISHER
PLAT
FISHER
PLAT
S e a r c h O p t i o n s
Pa r c e l N o
S i t e A d d r e s s
M a i l A d d r e s s
M a p S c a l e : 1 : 4 ,8 0 0
S h o w r e s u l t s i n a t a b l e , n o t t h e m a p .H eDisclaimerContact G I S
P a r c e l S e a r c h
Zoom In Zoom Out Full Extent Prev Extent Next Extent Pan Draw Measure Layers Results Print
+
−
Zo o m t o L o c a t i o n >
M a n a g e L a y e r s
C u r r e n t M a p T h e m e : S h o r e l i n e M a n a g e m e n t
C h o o s e A T h e m e
Wa t e r b o d i e s
S h o r e l i n e M a s t e r P l a n
B u i l d i n g s A d d r e s s e s
C r i t i c a l _A r e a s
Wa t e r b o d i e s
We t l a n d s
F E M A F l o o d H a z a r d A r e a s
H y d r i c S o i l s
G e o l o g i c _H a z a r d s
L a y e r L i s t L e g e n d
FISHER
PARCEL
FISHER
PARCEL
Published for
October 25
Study Session
ITEM A4 – Public Comments
From: christie schultz <christiesue5150@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 9:35 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Proposed sewer hook-up for Fisher plat development
I live on Candy Cane Lane, otherwise known as Viewcrest Drive, just to the north of this proposed
development. Lived here 22 years now. My family was associated here years prior, working on the
Bangor base construction. I am happy being in the county, and believe me, my property taxes pay for
services, it's not like I'm enjoying urban benefits for free. My septic system works just great and is well
maintained.
The question before the Bremerton City Council right NOW is, whether to allow a hook-up for the Fisher
plat proposed development of 186 units. At the meeting of Oct 18, 2023, it was plain the locals don't want
it, anymore than they wanted to be annexed into the city, and we sure don't want sewer lines and sewer
taxes. It looks like both proposals are being driven by the same person, a developer with a desire for high
density housing.
Two speakers at the meeting made good sense, Gary Anderson (spoke for the development team) and
Judith Krigsman on open mike (please review what they had to say.) I'm sorry to say I was really put off
by the presentation by Ms. Hitch, she did not speak clearly and I have no idea what facts and figures she
was putting out; perhaps that was intentional, I'd hate to think so. It sounded like more taxes, and your
average citizen doesn't want that either!!! Indeed, the entire proposal is VERY vague, the developer is
trying to get an ok for a sewer hook-up (so he can get a loan!!!) with absolutely NO clear plan for the type
of sewer piping, where it will be laid; is it above ground, below ground, how much street is he planning to
dig up, will it rupture in a tectonic event and flood the area and salmon streams with high pressure fecal
matter??? I liked VERY much what Mr. Anderson said, because there is a LOT of research that needs to
be done yet, and for that reason alone, with no clear reliable plan, the city should take pause prior to
facilitating ANYTHING regarding the development. Make them do their homework first. Please.
There aren't very many "pros" to this development, not for citizens and local residents. Invoking the
UGA/GMA ordinance(s) sounds great until you take a closer look at the terrain. The Fisher annex is NOT
a good place to build, which is probably why no one has built on it yet, the land slopes (a 15 foot drop
off 30th at the end of Viewcrest), the soil is friable.
The City of Bremerton needs to consider if their sewer system can handle 186 more homes hooked to
their system. Can the roads in that area handle the new units? There USED to be an elementary school
sitting where Mountain View Middle School is right now, but that was scooped off the map. Where did you
plan to bus all those small children (K-5th grade) from the 186 units, for education? Have you planned for
all the traffic from the buses?
There is no plan for storm-water run off from this proposed development, you can't just dump it into an
ecologically fragile zone. There are many other concerns involving salmon streams, environmental impact
and geological fitness of the terrain and soil in the area, but those are more properly addressed with the
county. In the long run, what is the City of Bremerton letting themselves in for if they green-light the hook-
up for this proposed development? And what will the Bremerton of the Future inherit when all this grows
into reality? The citizens who live in the area of the Fisher Plat are pretty upset. There is talk of hiring
lawyers and filing injunctions.
Judith Krigsman brought up something I worked on with her and the rest of the Illahee community some
years ago. As I recall, the entire eastern shore of our peninsula, from Gilberton, through Illahee, Illahee
Park, Candy Cane Lane, and the Cheney estates (now the Fisher properties) was designated a Greenbelt
BY THE COUNTY and along with that comes certain restrictions on building, not the least of which is a
low, protected density zone. Candy Cane Lane (Viewcrest) is designated a wildlife corridor (and believe
me, it is.... lots of critters in our yards!)
You need to consider whether removing this aquafer recharge area will impact the supply from North
Perry Water; we LIVE here, and know that every hot summer, North Perry Water runs incredibly low....
adding 186 units, and subtracting all that aquifer recharge forest is going to strain our water supply.
Septic systems help to recharge the aquafer, which is why they are preferable to sewer systems when
considering the "green" aspect of any development.
Please don't approve a sewer hook-up for this development. My concern is, once the high pressure, lift-
station-enabled sewer system has been installed for the development (going over one or two salmon
creeks) THEN a developer will come in and disrupt the forest and that ecosystem, then suddenly find
there are geological problems with this development, and the land will sit there, naked and un-used for
years. If you look at Illahee Creek delta, you will see what deforestation and urban-growth run-off does to
the shoreline. Bare land erodes QUICKLY and urban sprawl creates massive storm run-off. This too will
happen to the Enetai area, and the Fisher annex.
No one gives a hoot about the UGA/GMA except the developers. I heard repeatedly a cadence of "we
need more homes" and that's a lot of hogwash. We need the high-density homes near the city core where
the services are, not on the shoreline where there are no stores, no schools and no bus lines. There are
empty places to develop all up and down the 303 (Wheaton Way) corridor. This is a situation where a
developer got some unbuildable land for a relatively cheap price and wants to make a killing with a high-
density development. Stripping away all the emotions and greed attached to this proposition (yea or nay)
what this seems to be boiling down to is Greenbelt vs. Development. You as our elected officials, need to
consider, do we allow our community on the peninsula to become an ugly, over-developed extension of
the Seattle side? Or do we try and preserve a bit of nature next to our homes, and make the Bremerton
area a beautiful upscale place to be? All the "Quincy Square" art is not going to make this an attractive
destination; those tourists on the ferry and cruise ship want to see trees, not "art." How about building a
few natural walking trails???
We citizens who LIVE here would beg you to look at the bigger picture, and understand that developing
the eastern shoreline is NOT an inevitability, it's badly thought through and an ill-considered proposition.
It's causing more problems than it is solving. Please do not facilitate high density development in this
region. Maybe you should consider taking some of the money you plan to pour into the "art" for Quincy
square, and think of buying the Fisher plat for a park! What a concept.
Thank you for your time, best regards, Christie Schultz
From: Bill Gannon <wilgan47@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 1:41 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: City council meeting Oct 18
My name is William Gannon and I live in the county at 3118 Viewcrest Dr. which is very close to that
Fisher Plat project. At the council meeting last night, the public presented evidence this project will
destroy the habitat for a substantial amount and variety of wild life, plus decrease the quality
environment. This area has low vehicle traffic and a beautiful forest, which city and county residents to
escape the summer heat and visit nature.
This area as it is improves the quality of life for everyone that uses it. It is also provides vital living area
for wild life.
By a narrow interpretation of your operating guidelines, you just provide a sewage removal service to
the community. Your service is not needed in the county, the county has it’s own standards for
development.
This developer is trying to squeeze through the laws to maximize his profit by offering to build a
expensive sewage line for free. It is not free. It will drive up the cost of community services provided to
the residence.
This project does not fit into the Kitsap County Comprehensive Plan 2044. The plan talks about planning
community growth around government provided services, transportation hubs and upgraded utilities. It
also states we should protect the environment. Everyone in the room could see that this attempt by a
small, but very wealthy corporation to make a large profit at the expense of county, city and people of
Bremerton.
Please do your civic duty and vote no on the sewer expansion project.
Bill Gannon
From: Sarah Palama-Hoffer <sarahpalama@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2023 12:05 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Garrett Jackson
<Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Ned Lever
<Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; kwalters@kitsap.gov
Subject: Public meeting.
Good morning,
I just wanted to start by saying thank you for letting all of my neighbors and myself speak yesterday. I
know it was overwhelming to hear from so many people that are not technically any of your
constituents. You can understand why a lot of us were so passionate when it felt like the developers
engineering team was making it very clear that we were not Bremerton residents. Which was ironic
because none of them are Bremerton residents and neither is the developer. Councilwoman Frey, thank
you so much for speaking up for us. A lot of us felt acknowledged by your comments and want you to
know we appreciate it. Looking at the urban growth boundaries for east Bremerton, it seems a large
majority of that 303 corridor and residents along illahee are also not considered Bremerton residents so
I am sure they also share our passion for feeling under represented in situations like this. We contribute
to businesses in Bremerton just as much as city residents ,have our children in bremerton school district
and support city businesses in numerous ways. I for one saw that our children’s school, Kitsap Lake
Elementary, did not have a PTA so I figured out how to start a nonprofit and incorporated through the
state and IRS in a month so that the school did not go without a parent teacher organization. If you’re
wondering why we do not go to our district school which is view ridge, it’s because our oldest is a highly
gifted student and Kitsap Lake is the only school in the district that provides those services to the gifted
kids in the district. We miss our district school but knew this was the right choice for his academics. We
love this community dearly and while we are not city residents, we are part of Bremerton. That being
said, is there a way to be notified on when this decision will be made so we are able to be there in
person? All of us are running on hopes and dreams at this point but I know we all want to make sure to
stay on top of the decision if there are further questions to be had or answered.
Thank you again and have a great rest of the week. Below you will find a few articles to have on hand.
One published in the Kitsap Sun and the other from a King 5 story from last night.
Sincerely,
Sarah Hoffer
https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/bremerton/development-proposal-bremerton-
concerns/281-c0518811-a450-4945-bbad-0bc556ab5bb3
https://www.kitsapsun.com/restricted/?return=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.kitsapsun.com%2Fstory%2Fnew
s%2F2023%2F10%2F17%2Fdeveloper-asks-bremerton-to-approve-sewer-utility-for-189-
homes%2F71171467007%2F#lnwapr62m93v0xc6xee
From: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 10:57 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Greg Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Kylie Finnell
<Kylie.Finnell@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey <Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Andrea
Spencer <Andrea.Spencer@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Garrett Jackson
<Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Robert
Endsley <Robert.Endsley@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; kwalters@kitsap.gov
Subject: Citizen Message - Public Comments on Fisher Plat (Steven Harris)
Atn: Council Members (FYI)
A voice message was received at the Council Office on October 19 at 8:54 AM from Steven Harris. He
provided comments in support of “Resolution No. 3367 to authorize the Extension of Wastewater Utility
Services to the Fisher Plat located within the East Bremerton Urban Growth Area”; and emphasized the
need for more housing.
Since he also referenced King 5 News, I’ve copied the link below to the online ar�cle and newsclip for
your reference:
htps://www.king5.com/ar�cle/news/local/bremerton/development-proposal-bremerton-
concerns/281-c0518811-a450-4945-bbad-0bc556ab5bb3
Mr. Harris did not request a call, but le� his contact informa�on as (315) 657-1870.
Lastly, a copy of this email will be included in the record for the October 25 Study Session.
Christine Grenier
Legislative/Auditor Assistant
Bremerton City Council
(360) 473-5280
www.BremertonWA.gov
From: Anthony Augello <chipaugel77@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 9:24 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Fisher plat concern
To Whom It May Concern,
Please provide the code that the Bremerton City Council is considering that gives Bremerton a poten�al
right to extend sewer u�lity service through a non-con�guous unincorporated area in which the
residents voted 90% not to be annexed so that the sewer system will reach a proposed urban growth
area (UGA).
Also, please provide informa�on that shows the proposed UGA is actually considered part of the City of
Bremerton already.
Thank you,
Anthony Augello
From: Anthony Augello <chipaugel77@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 9:47 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Concerns RE: Fisher Plat (Anthony Augello)
Thank you. Also, if legal at all, what is being done to ensure the plans, proposed scope of work, and
details of the project are reviewed beforehand to address all the environmental impacts resulting from
this proposal, including wildlife, fisheries and Puget Sound contamination, as well as increased traffic,
emergency access concerns, infrastructure, and pollution?
SUBJECT: Sewer Availability for the Development on the Fisher Estate for
everyone
The environment is the source of life for everyone. We must balance the natural
cycle that exists between the environment and the lives of human beings, plants,
and animals.
Team 4 Engineering needs to understand that the Illahee community saw this
coming back in 2006 and 2008, so the community got together and wrote a
Community Plan. I was part of that committee. Our Board of County
Commissioners approved this plan, and you w ill find it part of the KC
Comprehensive Plan. Illahee’s boundary is a stone's throw from 40 St. In our
Illahee Community Plan this area is zoned Restricted, and Greenbelt with a View
Protection Overlay for this area. There is a reason for this. I suggest Team 4
Engineering revisit the Illahee Community Plan and the Kitsap County
Comprehensive Plan. This would benefit them. The terrain is not suited for
sewers. Illahee's zoning reflects this.
In the Illahee Community Plan we address the Bremer -Cheney-now Fisher Estate.
This wildlife patch connects to Illahee State Park and then to the Illahee Preserve.
There is a reason the zoning is Restricted, Greenbelt. Kitsap County recognizes
the fragility of the area and chose to listen to its Illahee neighbors and enforce
and endorse Illahee's Community Plan. It works well and rearranging the
environment with 189 new homes and sewers would be a grave mistake.
In closing, this property contains this land of historical significance. The very
founder of Bremerton, Mr. Bremer, saw this property as a special place to live,
The Cheney family saw the value of the forest, this is our history, Bremerton’s
history. Will the Fisher family find a way to recognize the historical and
environmental value of what they are proposing? Sewer approval for this
property will open Pandora’s Box beyond what we can imagine now and would be
a travesty to our community and the wildlife community existing there now. Do
not allow this to become unbalanced.
It is our responsibility to see this does not happen and work together for a more
sustainable future. This request by Team 4 is not viable.
Respectfully submitted: Judith Krigsman 5171 Illahee Rd. 360 792 6934
From: Judith Krigsman <KRIGSMAN83@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 7:58 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Public Comment re: Sewer Availability for the Fisher Plat
Please distribute the attached public comment letter to each City Council member.
Thank You
Judith Krigsman
5171 Illahee Rd. NE
Bremerton, WA. 98311
360 792 6934
email: krigsman83@msn.com
From: Larry Thomas <stonetheking@hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 7:57 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: New housing development in Enetai.
We the people in Illahee and Enetai do not want a new housing development in this peaceful
neighborhood. We do not want you superseding the residences sediment of a developers sewer system.
From: Suzanne Rowley <smrowley@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 12:45 AM
To: KWalters@kisap.gov; City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Kathie.lustig@icloud.com
Subject: Land development between E 30th Street, Trenton and Rozewood
Bremerton City Council and County Commissioner Katie Walters,
The City of Bremerton and the County of Kitsap have an important decision in front of them. Some may
say, ''our decision is only, '' Is the city able to handle sewer hook up for this development?''. Others may
say, ''our decision is only whether we will allow the permitting of this development''. But as we all know
personally and professionally, especially if we are in public or elected service, all decisions have rippling
ramifications.
When the ''circle'' was drawn to decide where to attempt to keep high density zoning so that Bremerton
did not proceed into urban sprawl, probably it was innocent enough deciding on a distance from the City
center without looking at specific areas within that distance. If people had looked at this land in
particular, they would see that it is not flat like the land above Safeway, or behind Wilco for example,
[offered as an example where high density housing was allowed to be built], the property of the old
Cheney estate, in contrast, consists of steep hillsides and ravines.
I do not know how many of the County Commissioners or City Council has walked the trail from the end
of Keel to the end of 30th but if they had they would see, not only the beauty of this old forest- [maybe
2nd growth],- but how fragile it truly is. I am offering to meet anyone so inclined to walk this trail with
me. I am flexible on my time on most days besides Tuesdays. You would see the site of the huge cliff
collapse of 8 to 10 years ago that fell, giving an unobstructed view straight across the water to Port
Orchard and the thicket of Alders that have grown up in the aftermath. You would also see where the
new cliff edge is being eroded with the potential to break off a new section. You would see the small
erosion near the trail that probably by next spring, will have opened to a larger gully funneling rain
water down below. These are examples of the incline of this forested area and how rain is continually
trying to wash it down to sea level.
You would also realize that what is holding this area of land is the trees. Huge old trees. In order to build
at this density a person would have to do 1 of 2 things: after cutting down all the trees, either build each
house as a house on a hillside, driving pilings deep into the earth, or take the dirt off the high points and
fill in the ravines and gullies to make it more flat. And of course when you cut down all the trees you
create more problems with rain and water runoff without the roots taking up a huge quantity of water.
Not to mention the carbon dioxide not being absorbed and the oxygen not being released.
The City and County both talk about preserving the environment but then one decision at a time, in
isolation, they allow construction to build on fragile land by making small mitigations. Mitigations that
really are not equal to what has been destroyed. They look at each decision in isolation and say, ''well,
ok with this one''. And then, ''ok with that one''. At times the companies even cut down trees, or make
other beginnings to their plan without proper clearance or approval and then go, ''opps , my bad. Fine
me and I will pay'' and the city or county goes, 'ok, what can we do about it now'.
So, if you are interested in looking at the real repercussions of what your decision means, contact me, in
a group or individually, and I will walk you thru the trail so you can see the true meaning of your
decisions.
At that point you will have sufficient information along with the other information you already have, to
make this important decision.
I am thinking that 1 house per 1 acre or 1 house per 2.5 acres would make these houses safe enough
not to end up down at the bottoms of the ravines, would preserve the integrity of the land and still
make the developer gobs of money.
Suzanne Rowley
2507 NE 30th Street
Bremerton
360-509-9263
Fisher Plat - Public Hearing from Bremerton City Council on 10/18/2023
Developer Response to Comments
Developer Reputation: Comments were made disparaging the Fishers as having a poor record and
reputation as developers.
This must be an error.
The Fishers are from outside of the area and have never engaged in land development in Kitsap
County, or anywhere else for that matter.
The Fisher family spends their summers at the property; they have 4 young children, they
purchased the property because they love the area.
Zoning and Density:
The zoning for the property is Urban Low Residential (5 – 9 DU/AC). Kitsap County may object or
challenge any development that does not meet that target. That density is not achievable with on-
site septic systems.
Kitsap County recognizes community drainfields as a suitable method (under GMA) to achieve
urban densities for properties within the UGA where sewer is not readily available or cost effective
to provide.
Total Acres owned by Fishers:
Someone stated they own 100 acres, they own ~65 acres. The proposed development area is ~35
acres on the Western most two parcels.
Furthermore, the contributing area served by the proposed sewer pump station does not include
the waterfront Fisher properties.
Previous Property Owners Intent: Comments were made suggesting the previous owners (Cheney family)
intended for the property to remain undeveloped and/or developed at much less density.
In May 2016, the Cheney family wrote a letter to the Kitsap County Planning Supervisor which
strongly opposed against changing the zoning from Urban Low Residential (5-9 DU/AC) to Urban
Restricted (1-5 DU/AC).
Sewer Capacity Analysis:
The Perry Avenue sanitary sewer collection system is well under the capacity of the full buildout
of the existing service area and the proposed pump station contributing area.
The City Engineers concur there is enough capacity in the collection and treatment systems.
General Topics:
We are at the start of a multi-year process
Granting us permission to connect to the sewer isn't approving a housing development
We don't even know if the project is viable.
We are asking permission to connect to sewer because we think it's the best long-term solution
for development in the area. The property is in the UGA and eventually will be part of
Bremerton. The alternative is septic systems or a community drain field.
The purpose of the plat presented as 189 units was for the purpose of the sewer study. We had
to complete a study that represented the density provided by the zoning. We do not know what
a potential development could look like because that process hasn't started. Again, we are at the
very beginning of the process.
Illahee Community Plan:
Someone mentioned the 2008 Illahee Community Plan. This property was NOT included in that
plan. We found the plan and it discusses many topics as presented, although the Illahee
community plan boundary is North of the proposed parcel location, see below. Therefore, the
plan is not applicable to the proposed plat area.
From: kathie.lustig@icloud.com <kathie.lustig@icloud.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 1:38 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Public Comments re: Enetai Sewer Extension request
Dear City Council,
I thank you for giving the public opportunity to express their opinions and feelings about the pending
sewer extension request and the serious ramifications it could have on our neighborhoods. To make a
decision that impacts the lives of all the surrounding residents to this proposed subdivision AND NOT
consider the ramifications is irresponsible leadership. It appears that based on some of the City Council
members comments, that they have not walked the parcels or the surrounding areas adjacent to it. Im
not sure how members can vote on this sewer extension request under these circumstances without
doing due diligence on these parcels. This is a historical property once owned by Bremerton founder
William Bremer with topography that is the same as Illahee State Park. It is adjacent to a wildlife
corridor. The council, at a minimum owes it our community the effort to walk the area and visually see
how their decision could open the door to destroy a fragile old growth forest and destroy neighborhood
character and safety before making this decision. To put blinders on and state that this is a “deceptively”
complex and reduce it to only a “utility” provider service using a loophole in the rules is an insult to the
community.
The CC Chair has made some statements on Instagram that are, in part, inaccurate and with no ability
for anyone to comment or correct the information. The proposed draft subdivision is 189 homes vs 100+
stated on the instagram post. Minimizing the density does not serve to inform the public. Claims the
developer will pay the entire cost of extending the sewer to the parcel but fails to mention those costs
will be passed on clouds the facts. Passed on to anyone purchasing a home in his proposed subdivision
and other residences forced to hookup (when septics fail) to that reside 200’ of the sewer line and have
to pay the developer a fee. This cannot be simplified as a no-cost benefit to the city or to the residents in
the area. The developer is only bearing the “initial” costs of the sewer line connection that he needs to
build his subdivision with potential gross income of $140 Million dollars (based on $700K x 200 homes).
This is nothing more than an investment with high returns. Don't sell out our neighborhoods and old
growth forest for short-term gain being dangled in front of you for the profit of one developer and/or
investor partnerships. The real value is in the residents who live here and truly care about their
properties and community.
The map posted on Instagram shows the developer’s other adjacent properties for “potential
development”. One only has to walk the beach and the property, to see those adjacent parcels have
little “development” potential given the slope and unstable soils alone. The attached maps showing
hazards make it abundantly clear how unsuitable it is. The developer wants to removed trees at the top
of the other parcels so his subdivision could have better views. Those adjacent parcels are zoned "Urban
Restricted” (Blue) just as most all the parcels and lots around it. There is a reason the county came in, in
2016 and rezoned a large swath of coastal parcels in this area to Urban Restricted. It's unclear why the
zoning in the area even didn't go a step further.
HISTORICAL ZONING ON THESE PARCELS
"The proposed development is currently zoned Urban Low-Density Residential , e.g., the County has
already slated it for development.”. Perhaps some history on the zoning changes to this property
would be helpful to put into perspective. My attached maps hopeful provide some detail and simplicity.
The information is pulled off the current Kitsap County GIS Parcel Search map and the date of the data
used to create it is unknown. The information I have conflicts with the information submitted and
presented by Jon Rose, with the company designation of Alchemy Development in this weeks study
packet. It has no address or identifying information below the logo.
As a professional Cartographer/ graphic artist, I have designed maps, charts and graphs to present
information accurately, properly sourced and in a professional reader-friendly form. The one-page
“Fisher Plat Comprehensive Plan and Regulatory History” and attached maps of comprehensive plans by
year are not reader-friendly by any means. The maps are illegible and cover too big of area to see any
real detail. An unreadable map serves no purpose and nothing more than a filler to back up a one page
undated typed statement with no letterhead that doesn't represent all the facts.
The facts are:
1. The County rezoned a large swath of parcels abutting the shoreline from Manette up to the north to
30th for these purposes in 2016 to Urban Restricted. See blue areas that surround the Proposed Fisher
Plat on ZONING.pdf.
2. Kitsap County has NOT planned for 25 years that these parcels are targeted for Urban-level growth.
The County deemed these parcels should be Urban Restricted in 2016.
3. The Cheney Foundation (former owners) opposed the rezoning to Urban Restricted. They did some lot
line adjustments to the parcels resulting in reconfigurations with the less steep areas combined into the
top two for future development purposes and just prior to putting the property up for sale for 5 million
dollars. The Cheney Foundation then offered a compromise to the County, that allowed the other
parcels to be rezoned Urban Restricted and the top two parcels to remain Urban Low Residential.
4. The other property owners adjacent on all boundaries to the Cheney Foundation parcels (now Fisher)
were NOT notified by the county of any changes/rezoning or the Compromise Agreement between the
County and the Cheney Foundation prior to its sale in 2017. (Attached) Apparently the County has no
requirements to notify adjacent property owners of lot line adjustments within contiguous parcels.
5. The property owners adjacent to (west of) the Fisher parcel on Hillside (south of 30th) had their
properties rezoned in 2016 to Urban Restricted apparently without notification from the county.
Residents are only learning now what has transpired.
6. It is unknown how and when they Cheney Foundation was notified of the rezoning on their parcels,
allowed to oppose it, when other property owners were not? The Hillside owners parcels are flat
relative to the former Cheney parcels allowed to remain Urban Low-Residential.
7. The shaded and colored areas reflected on the Hazards map show the significant Critical Areas on the
Fisher properties. IE: Dark is bad. That hazards are too numerous to address at this time.
8. A map with smaller contour intervals would reflect the actual detail of topography of the proposed
subdivision. I have requested updated data and smaller scale maps.
9. The steep and uneven topography on these parcels is essentially the same as Illahee State Park. A
wildlife corridor connects it to the Fisher parcels.(See olive green on ZONING map)
10. It is unclear why the GB (Wildlife Corrider) directly adjacent to the Fisher parcels did not continue
south. Anyone whom has walked the area or resides around the Fisher Plat parcels knows full well the
animals that move through here. It is a wildlife corridor.
11. The proposed Narrative for the sewer line extension mentions the Fisher Parcel has a west boundary
with Hillside, most of which is unopened ROW (Right -of-Way) and part of the old growth forest. There is
no mention that the development could and likely would open roads (Keel, Helm, Rozewood & Hillside)
that feed to Rozewood Estates creating safety hazards in that neighborhood. Opening these roads to
200 homes would essential destroy the quiet safety of this neighborhood. The same would happen to
the residents on and off 30th. This property is on an island with only one way in and one way out.
10. The preferred sewer extension route construction on Helm would slice Rozewood Estates in half
making it a nightmare in our quiet neighborhood.
I sincerely hope that the City Council will fully evaluate this proposed sewer extension request and
consider all the facts. Again, I encourage you all to go and get boots on the ground to see for yourself
the impacts your decision will have on the neighborhoods around this proposed subdivision and the old
growth forest before you sign off on it’s destruction. You will see for yourself, that a density of this
magnitude is NOT appropriate in this setting. Additionally, it does not fit the City priorities for Regional
Urban Growth targeted areas of already existing density and infrastructure. Short-term fiscal benefits do
not pencil out at this time in the long-term. Another day, and another parcel. You are their to build, not
destroy.
Sincerely,
Kathie Lustig
Rozewood Drive Resident
S e a r c h O p t i o n s
Pa r c e l N o
S i t e A d d r e s s
M a i l A d d r e s s
M a p S c a l e : 1 : 4 ,8 0 0
S h o w r e s u l t s i n a t a b l e , n o t t h e m a p .H eDisclaimerContact G I S
P a r c e l S e a r c h
Zoom In Zoom Out Full Extent Prev Extent Next Extent Pan Draw Measure Layers Results Print
+
−
Zo o m t o L o c a t i o n >
M a n a g e L a y e r s
C u r r e n t M a p T h e m e : S h o r e l i n e M a n a g e m e n t
C h o o s e A T h e m e
Wa t e r b o d i e s
S h o r e l i n e M a s t e r P l a n
B u i l d i n g s A d d r e s s e s
C r i t i c a l _A r e a s
Wa t e r b o d i e s
We t l a n d s
F E M A F l o o d H a z a r d A r e a s
H y d r i c S o i l s
G e o l o g i c _H a z a r d s
L a y e r L i s t L e g e n d
FISHER
PARCEL
FISHER
PARCEL
S e a r c h O p t i o n s
Pa r c e l N o
S i t e A d d r e s s
M a i l A d d r e s s
M a p S c a l e : 1 : 1 0 ,0 0 0
S h o w r e s u l t s i n a t a b l e , n o t t h e m a p .H eDisclaimerContact G I S
P a r c e l S e a r c h
Zoom In Zoom Out Full Extent Prev Extent Next Extent Pan Draw Measure Layers Results Print
+
−
Zo o m t o L o c a t i o n >
M a n a g e L a y e r s
C u r r e n t M a p T h e m e : Zo n i n g
C h o o s e A T h e m e
Wa t e r b o d i e s
B u i l d i n g s A d d r e s s e s
Zo n i n g
V i e w P r o t e c t i o n O v e r l a y
D e s i g n D i s t r i c t s
K i t s a p C o u n t y Zo n i n g D e s i g n a t i o n s
K i t s a p C o u n t y 1 9 9 8 Zo n i n g D e s i g n a t i o n s
P a r c e l s
Ta x P a r c e l s O u t l i n e s
L a y e r L i s t L e g e n d FISHER
PLAT
FISHER
PLAT
From: Blake Hoffer <blakejhoffer@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 11:03 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Andrea Spencer <Andrea.Spencer@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Garrett Jackson
<Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Janelle
Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Robert Endsley <Robert.Endsley@ci.bremerton.wa.us>;
Thomas Knuckey <Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; kwalters@kitsap.gov
Subject: Re: Public Comments - Fisher Plat Project (Blake Hoffer)
Resending to correct a unit conversion error I made when calculating depth of wastewater piping from
my property to Hillside Drive below. Apologies for the error and multiple emails.
Blake Hoffer
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 9:55 AM Blake Hoffer <blakejhoffer@gmail.com> wrote:
Good morning-
I have been reading through the Fisher Plat Sewer Analysis from Team4 and there appears to be some
incorrect conclusions detailed in the report. Paragraph III.A. (Contributing Area) states the following:
“Per a request from the City of Bremerton Engineering Department (see Appendix B), the gravity portion
of the proposed service area has been requested to also include the adjacent areas within TRT-2, TRT-3,
and TRT-4 that will flow by gravity to the proposed project Pumping Station location.”
My property is shown inside the Kitsap County UR - Gravity area to the west of the Fisher plat when
referencing Figure 3 of this report. Due to the topography of this area, it is totally unrealistic for my
property, or many others in surrounding areas, to flow by gravity to the proposed Pumping Station
location. This area is down slope and sloping away from the Fisher plat. Assuming a standard downward
slope for wastewater piping of 0.25”/foot, my gravity wastewater piping would be just short of 15 feet
deep just to get it up to Hillside Drive. The piping would have to then continue deeper still until it could
intersect with a lateral somewhere on the Fisher plat. Other properties in the area further downslope
and away from the Fisher plat would have even more extreme difficulties installing gravity wastewater
systems. This effort would place an enormous burden on my neighbors and me. A burden that is not
represented well in the statement by the developers at the City Council meeting last week, “Surrounding
properties would have the opportunity to hookup to City sewer.” The Sewer Analysis is drawing
erroneous conclusions about the surrounding areas and not exhibiting just how much of an impact this
has on the community.
Blake Hoffer
From: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 3:03 PM
To: Anthony Augello <chipaugel77@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Kylie Finnell
<Kylie.Finnell@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey <Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Andrea
Spencer <Andrea.Spencer@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Garrett Jackson
<Garrett.Jackson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Robert
Endsley <Robert.Endsley@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; kwalters@kitsap.gov; City Council
<City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Continued Concerns RE: Fisher Plat (Anthony Augello)
Hi Mr. Augello,
I wanted to provide the attached PDF that is a portion of the Council packet from the Oct.
18 public meeting (all publicly available via https://www.bremertonwa.gov/706/Agenda-
Packet). It should contain all the information you are requesting regarding relevant laws
and procedures regarding the city and the proposed sewer extension.
Regarding Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) and Annexation, this webpage has a wealth of
information and shows a graphic of all of Bremerton's UGAs, including the East Bremerton
UGA where the plat in question is located: https://www.bremertonwa.gov/170/Annexation
Should this area be developed, since it is in the County, the County would oversee all
permitting, planning, environmental review, access, etc. The County Commissioner that
represents the area in question, Commissioner Katie Walters, is CCed to provide you
answers on that process and concerns.
Cheers,
Jeff
--
This e-mail and further communication may be subject to public disclosure, if requested under the Washington Public Records Act (RCW 42.56).
To: City Council
From: Janelle Hitch, Managing Engineer – Development, of Public Works and Utilities
Date: 9/15/2023
Re: Fisher Plat Request for Utility Services outside the City of Bremerton City Limits
Request: The Applicant, John Fisher and Shawna Epp, have requested City wastewater utility
services for a proposed 189-lot subdivision in the Enetai neighborhood. The Fisher Plat is
proposed for tax parcels 072402-2-107-2007 & 072402-2-104-2000 overlooking Port Orchard
Narrows (the water body) to the east and bounded by the following streets: Hillside Drive NE, NE
30th Street and NE Enetai Beach Road (see Exhibit 1 Site Map).
City Council’s Decision: Pursuant to Bremerton Municipal Code (BMC) 15.03.040, “It is the
general policy of the City of Bremerton that properties located outside the City limits annex into
the City before wastewater utility services are provided to those properties. For the purpose of
this section, “service” means extension of and/or service connections to City wastewater utilities
to property located outside City limits.” The City Council may, in its sole and absolute discretion,
provide wastewater utility services to properties outside of the City limits if certain conditions
are met. The relevant exception for the Council to allow wastewater utility services without
annexation falls under BMC 15.03.040 (b) (1) "Annexation Not Feasible.”
Department of Community Development (DCD) Analysis of Annexation: Pursuant to Bremerton
Municipal Code (BMC) 15.30.040 when an owner of a property located outside the City limits
requests extension of utility service, the City Council may provide wastewater utility services to
those properties if annexation is not feasible. This portion of this document summarizes why
annexation for tax parcels 072402-2-107-2007 & 072402-2-104-2000 (the subject parcels) is not
considered feasible at this time.
Exhibit 2, attached, shows the location of the potential annexation request in Enetai. The figure
shows the city limits of Bremerton and the Kitsap County jurisdiction.
Per state law and Kitsap Countywide Planning Policies, you may annex property if it is contiguous
to City of Bremerton limits. As the subject properties are not contiguous to the City limits, the
City could not annex this property alone. To make annexation possible, more propertie s would
DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS, UTILITIES
& ENGINEERING
MEMORANDUM
need to be included into the annexation area to make this area contiguous to the City of
Bremerton limits.
When reviewing a larger possible annexation area (identified as the Annexation Study Area in
Exhibit 1), annexation analysis using the Petition Method of Annexation was performed. This
commonly used annexation method requires the signatures of property owners representing
60% of the total assessed property value of the area to be in support of the proposed annexation.
This proposed annexation area does not have the required 60% of the total assessed property
value as illustrated here:
Proposed Area includes:
~350 acres; see the Annexation Exhibit for the proposed annexation area.
o 483 parcels;
o Assessed property value of $169,023,410
60% of the total property value needed to finalize the process = $101,414,046
In order to make this annexation viable, the City needs to obtain annexation agreements or
petition signatures with the property owners within this area which equates to about $100
million in assessed property value.
Therefore, if the City received a Petition to Annex from the property owner, this request will
not be successful as the City does not currently have the support of 60% of the total assessed
property values for the properties proposed to be annexed. With the requester petitioning the
City to annex, the City would have 7.2% of the total assessed property values in the area
proposed to be annexed.
Proposed Wastewater Service Extension: In order for the City to provide wastewater service to
the Fisher Plat, the developer will be required to extend the existing sewer service. Per the 2014
Wastewater Comprehensive Plan Update, the project area is within the Trenton Avenue Sewer
Basin service area (“TRT-1”). The preliminary design of the extension that would service the
Fisher Plat is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and sized to accommodate future
development. The extension would include approximately 4,000 feet of 6 -inch force main and
a lift station. Capacity analysis of the existing system suggests that there is capacity in the system
to handle the additional flow at full future build-out.
Fiscal impacts of not providing utility service are:
Not receiving the system extension.
Loss of revenue of approximately $1.5 million in General Facility Charges; and
Loss of approximately $250,000 annually in usage charges.
Summary: As demonstrated in the DCD Annexation Analysis, a significant number of additional
properties are needed to support annexation of this area. As such, Public Works staff consider
annexation as currently infeasible. The City Council must decide in its sole and absolute
discretion whether to provide wastewater service to this property in accordance with BMC
15.03.040 (b)(1) - Annexation Not Feasible.
Exhibit 1: Site Map
Exhibit 2 – Annexation Study
From: Gretchen Ritter-Lopatowski <info@threeleavesdesign.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 1:18 PM
To: Kwalters@kitsap.gov; Janelle Hitch <Janelle.Hitch@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; City Council
<City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Public Comment Regarding Fisher Plat Development
To the Bremerton City Council in regard to the proposal of allowing sewer access to the Fisher Plat in
Enetai.
I am a resident of the Enetai Beach Community (on the private Enetai Beach Rd), and though this
proposal of land development doesn’t directly connect to my property, the Fisher forest connects to the
forest on my land, and it connects to my community and will inevitably change the fabric of this peaceful
community.
It’s prety clear that the popular vote is that the community overwhelmingly doesn’t want this sewer
connec�on to happen. These are quiet, peaceful cul-de-sacs, and the City could allow them to become
pass-through streets for a mass development of homes.
Yes, the land is within the Urban Growth Area, but that area was established over 25 years ago, and a lot
has changed in our climate awareness in 25 years. People appreciate green spaces now more than ever
before. Not just for our personal health but for the health of our communi�es, wildlife, and, most
importantly, our planet.
It seems the biggest argument for sewer expansion from the developers was because of the UGA
borders. I have no evidence as to how or why the UGA borders were established back in 1998, but it
seems prety clear that it’s just a blanket over most of East Bremerton. I’m fairly confident that none of
the land typography or exis�ng forests were taken into considera�on when establishing the UGA. Just
because the area was established in this zone doesn’t mean that it should be developed that way -
especially when the voices of the residents who live in the area are begging you to reconsider it.
We all understand that this land will most likely get developed at some point in �me, but it should be
developed with considera�on to the neighbors and landscape upon which it rests. I ask you please, in
your review, to consider the following:
1. If I recall correctly, a council member stated that how the land is developed isn’t a concern of
the City Council but instead for the County to determine. “We’re a u�lity provider like power,
water…” Yes, but currently, the Council has the ability to determine how this land will be
developed by providing them with sewer. So it is, in fact, currently the Council’s job to
determine if this land will be developed to its max capacity or not.
2. By providing the Fisher Plat sewer access, you will be going against the wishes of over 90% of
the residents in this area. The annexa�on survey that was sent received an overwhelming
response that 90% of the residents had no interest in annexing to the city. However, Fisher’s
development could exceed the 60% of the property values in this area required to annex,
effec�vely forcing us all to annex when development is finished. Please consider that 90+% of
residents who requested not to annex and don’t want access to the city sewer system. Those
same residents will be forced to join the city sewer system if something ever happens to their
sep�c. Consider those quiet, peaceful cul-de-sacs you have to trench through to allow this
developer to develop the land to a capacity no one in the area welcomes.
3. Consider the cri�cal zones on this area of land. Consider the water aquifers. Consider the
thousands of animals that have called this land their home for genera�ons. There are bald
eagles and their nests, owls, ospreys, coyotes, deer, foxes, river oters, and poten�ally bears and
cougars. Again, just because this area was zoned for urban growth doesn’t mean that the
planners took into account all of the wildlife that will have nowhere to go when their land is
destroyed. They will be forced into the backyards of those around them, and with less food and
shelter, many will die. I hear the coyotes almost every night in the ravine and forests, I wonder
whose backyard they will go to find food when their home is destroyed.
If the Council doesn’t want to be a part of how this land gets developed, then we ask you to vote no on
approving sewer access to the Fisher Plat. You can then leave it up to the County, which one of you
already said was their responsibility anyway. Don’t provide sewer to them and then tell us that it’s no
longer your problem and we need to deal with the county for complaints. The Council has the power to
dictate at what capacity this land will be developed. Please don’t just look at the botom dollar and extra
income it could earn the city; look to the residents and hear our voices.
Gretchen Ritter-Lopatowski
Owner. Graphic Designer.
THREE LEAVES DESIGN
(m) 619.325.9609
threeleavesdesign.com
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Change Order No. 2 to the Public Works
Agreement with Utter Associates, Inc for
Design and Installation of Audio-Visual
Equipment at the Bremerton Municipal Court
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: Municipal Court
Presenter: Melinda Monroe
Phone: (360) 473-5306
SUMMARY:
The City’s contractor, Utter Associates has completed design and installation of the new Audio Visual
Equipment at the Bremerton Municipal Court, and made a request for a final change order in the
amount of $7,358.43 bringing the total changes to the agreement to $33,369.57 and bringing the new
total contract price to: $185,969.57. This is an aggregated 21% increase to the original contract cost
requiring City Council approval. The Contractor has agreed to this final contract amount. Change
order 1 included a re-routing of conduit directly to the IT room and Change order 2 includes extra
cabling and connecting equipment not included in the original order placed by the contractor. This
change was not provided to the City until our September close-out. All work is signed off and agreed
upon and this request is considered a typical final materials charge, approved by the City as there
were not as-builts for planning.
ATTACHMENTS:
Change order 2
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): no change
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ Limited Presentation ☐ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve Change Order 2 to the Public Works Agreement with Utter Associates in the
amount of $7,385.43 and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agreement with
substantially the same terms and conditions as presented.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 11/09/2021
A5
Page 1 of 3
Contract Modification 2 – Utter Associates, Inc.
Rev. 09/2021
CONTRACT MODIFICATION AGREEMENT NO. 2
TO THE PUBLIC WORKS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
BREMERTON AND UTTER ASSOCIATES, INC.
PROJECT: Municipal Court Audio Visual Systems Upgrade - contract number: 6487
CONSULTANT: Utter Associates, Inc.
DATE: October 4, 2023
THIS CONTRACT MODIFICATION AGREEMENT SPECIFICALLY AMENDS THE
AGREEMENT (the "Contract") entered into between the City of Bremerton and Utter
Associates, Inc. as entered into on February 16, 2023 and as modified on April 4, 2023.
All provisions in the Contract shall remain in full force and effect except as expressly modified
by this document.
For valuable consideration and by mutual consent of the parties, the modifications to the
Contract are as follows:
I.
Section I. Scope , is modified as follows:
See additional Scope of Work items as attached in Exhibit A.
Section II. Term , is modified as follows:
NO CHANGE
Section III. Compensation , is modified as follows:
The original contract amount was one hundred fifty-two thousand and six-hundred Dollars
($152,600.00). Modification No. 1 to this agreement resulted in an increase to the total contract
price making the new total contract amount: one-hundred seventy-eight thousand, five hundred
eighty-four dollars and fourteen cents ($178,584.14). The City shall pay the Contractor for the
additional work described above, based on time and materials, an amount not to exceed seven
thousand three-hundred and eighty-five dollars and forty-three cents, ($7,385.43) including sales
tax and permits, for a total amended contract amount of one-hundred eighty-five thousand, nine
hundred sixty-nine dollars and fifty-seven cents ($185,969.57), including this Contract
Modification.
C. Payment Schedule:
20% due 15 days after contract signing ....................................... $29,709.45
Part 1: As invoiced for design, system integration, equipment, removal,
bonding, delivery and sales tax (up to on-site work)* minus
retainage...................................................................................... $79,411.89
Page 2 of 3
Contract Modification 2 – Utter Associates, Inc.
Rev. 09/2021
Part 2: As invoiced for installation through substantial completion including
sales tax (on-site)
*minus retainage......................................................... $69,462.80 $76,848.23
Total: ...............................................................................$178,584.14 185,969.57
5% retainage hold-back, due 45 days after project acceptance ...$ 8,929.21
$ 9,298.48
Progress Payments. Contractor shall invoice the City for completed work per
payment schedule in Exhibits A and B and at the above payment schedule,
as soon as possible, after the first of each month, the Contractor shall submit
to the City an invoice for payment for the Work performed for each Project
in the preceding month less any retainage held per the schedule and rates in
Exhibit A and Exhibit B.
II.
Contractor accepts all requirements of this Contract Modification by endorsing below.
Contractor further agrees that this Contract Modification constitutes full and final
settlement of all of the Consultant’s claims for contract time and for all costs of any kind,
including without limitation, costs of delays related to any work either covered or affected
by this Contract Modification, claims related to on-site or home office overhead, or lost
profits. This Contract Modification does not limit the City’s right to bring a claim for past
performance.
The undersigned Contractor approves the foregoing Contract Modification as to the
changes, if any, in the contract price specified for each item, including any and all supervision
costs and other miscellaneous costs relating to the change in work, and as to the extension of
time allowed, if any, for completion of the entire work due to said Contract Modification.
This document will become a supplement of the contract and all provisions will apply hereto.
It is understood that this Contract Modification shall be effective when approved by the City
of Bremerton.
The parties whose names appear below warrant that they are authorized to enter into a
contract modification that is binding on the parties of this contract. In addition, Contractor
warrants that it has or will inform the surety of this change, and shall take appropriate action
to modify any bonds required under the contract to address this change.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Contract Modification on the day
and year first written above.
Page 3 of 3
Contract Modification 2 – Utter Associates, Inc.
Rev. 09/2021
UTTER ASSOCIATES, INC THE CITY OF BREMERTON
By: By:
Print Name: Print Name:
Its: Its:
Date: Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
By: By:
KYLIE J. FINNELL, Bremerton City Attorney ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk
R:\Legal\Legal\Forms\FORMS ON COBWEB\Contract Modification Rev. 09 2021.docx
Form Created 5/4/15
INFORMATION ONLY ITEM
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Update on Oyster Bay Avenue
Site Preparation and Homeless Shelter
Development
Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Presenter: Greg Wheeler
Phone: 360-473-5266
SUMMARY: Monthly update on the site preparation, partnerships, and site development to establish
a Homeless Shelter on undeveloped city-owned property adjacent to the Public Works Complex
located at 100 Oyster Bay Avenue North.
HANDOUTS:
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☐ No Presentation ☒ Full Presentation
A6
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Proposed Public Hearing on Resolution to
approve Community Development Block
Grant/HOME Funding Recommendations for
inclusion in the 2024 CDBG/HOME Action
Plan
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: DCD-CDBG
Presenter: Sarah Lynam
Phone: (360) 473-5375
SUMMARY: On June 21, 2023 City Council approved the 2024 CDBG/HOME Policy Plan outlining the
CDBG and HOME funding allocation process. Based on that policy, the Project Review Committee
(PRC) has developed the 2024 funding recommendations for Council consideration and approval. If
approved, these submissions will be sent to the Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) in the City’s Annual Action Plan.
The following projects are recommended for CDBG funding: City of Bremerton Public Works
Department Pedestrian Priority Network improvements, Kitsap Community Resources Weatherization
and Minor Home Repair, and the Kitsap Community Resources BE$T program.
The following project is recommended for HOME funding: Bremerton Housing Authority – Evergreen
Bright Start Property
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution with Exhibits
Exhibit A: 2024 Action Plan PRC recommendation for 2024 CDBG funding.
Exhibit B: Grant Recommendation Committee HOME Recommendations for Funding.
Exhibit C: CDBG Project Descriptions
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☐ Limited Presentation ☒ Full Presentation
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None. Block Grant is a pass-through funding from
the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and Federal Department of Treasury.
Form Updated 01/02/2018
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☒ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to pass Resolution No. _____ approving the 2024 funding recommendations to be included in
the 2024 Action Plan to HUD and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute the agency grant
agreements with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
A7
1
RESOLUTION NO. ________
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, approving the 2024 CDBG/HOME
Funding Recommendations for inclusion in the 2024 CDBG/HOME
Action Plan.
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton is an entitlement community which receives a
Community Development Block Grant (“CDBG”) each year from the Department of Housing
and Urban Development (“HUD”), and also receives funding from HUD’s Home Investment
Partnerships (“HOME”) program through its participation in the Kitsap County HOME
Consortium; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton has established a mandatory Policy Plan for
the City’s management of its HUD entitlement, including a citizen participation plan, application
and review processes, eligibility, and implementation requirements for grant funded projects; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton conducts a competitive annual process based
on the Policy Plan to determine allocation of CDBG and HOME entitlement; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton’s 2024 Policy Plan citizen participation plan
establishes a Project Review Committee to assist the Department of Community Development in
reviewing CDBG and HOME applications by interviewing applicants and recommending annual
project allocation decisions to the Bremerton City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton participates in a Coordinated Application
process with Kitsap County Block Grant Program and Kitsap County Housing and Homelessness
Program for HOME and Homeless Housing Grant Programs, and had its own competitive CDBG
RFP process which received four (4) capital applications, one (1) microenterprise application,
and two (2) job training application, and all were forwarded to the Project Review Committee;
and
WHEREAS, the CDBG Project Review Committee has reviewed, interviewed
and discussed each of the eligible funding requests and formulated funding recommendations
and a funding contingency plan based on their review; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton Block Grant staff on Friday, September 15th,
2023, posted the recommendations to the City of Bremerton’s website and advertised in the
Kitsap Sun a 30-day written public comment period commencing September 15th and
concluding October 16th, 2023; and
2
WHEREAS, no public comments were received during the public comment
period; and
WHEREAS, legal ads were placed in the Kitsap Sun on September 15th and
October 20th 2023 advertising the City of Bremerton Public Hearing adopting the funding
recommendations on November 1st 2023; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Community Development CDBG/HOME staff
presents the Project Review Committee’s recommendations to the City Council for adoption;
NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The recitals and findings of fact set forth in this resolution are
hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein.
SECTION 2. The 2024 CDBG/HOME Funding Recommendations attached
hereto as Exhibits A and B and described in Exhibit C, will be incorporated into the 2024
Action Plan to be submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for approval.
SECTION 3. 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 4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect and be in force
immediately upon its passage.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Bremerton, Washington this _____
day of __________________, 2023.
_________________________________
JEFFERY COUGHLIN, Council President
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
__________________________________ ________________________________
KYLIE FINNELL, City Attorney ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk
2024 City of Bremerton Project Review Committee Recommendations for Funding
2024 Estimated HUD Entitlement $370,000
+ Estimated Program Income $5,000
- CDBG Administration (20% of entitlement+
program income)$75,000.00
Available for CDBG Projects $300,000.00
Capital Projects:
Applicant Project Name Amount of Request Amount of Award
City of Bremerton Public Works & Utilities
Pedestrian Priority Network
Infrastructure Improvements $149,450.00 $149,450.00
Kitsap Community Resources Weatherization and Minor Home $70,000.00 $70,000.00
Kitsap Community Resources BE$T $40,000.00 $40,000.00
Total Requested: $259,450.00 $259,450.00
Total Estimated amount available for Capital Projects $243,750.00 $300,000.00
-$15,700.00 $40,550.00
Job Training Projects:
Applicant Project Name Amount of Request Amount of Award
The Coffee Oasis HOPE Inc. Job Training Program $75,000.00 $ -
Total Requested: $75,000.00 $0.00
Total Amount Available for Public Service Projects (up to 15%)$56,250.00 $0.00
-$18,750.00 $0.00
Contingencies:
Capital Projects: City of Bremerton Public Works and Kitsap Community Resources Weatherization and BE$T programs will be fully awarded
Any unallocated funds from the 2024 entitlement will be rolled to next year's funding process for a future project.
IF LESS THAN $370,000 MINUS THE UNALLOCATED AMOUNT OF $40,550 IS RECEIVED:
Kitsap Community Resources BE$T program would receive less funding.
If anything beyond these contingencies the Project Review Committee will reconvene
Exhibit A
2024 COORDINATED GRANT APPLICATION PROCESS
Department of Human Services
CDBG, HOME, HOME-ARP, and CIAH Funds
Capital Project Application Summaries
Agency- Project Name-Project Information-Description Request Award
AGAPE
Koinonia Inn O&M
Project Type: Service (Operations & Maintenance)
Location: Port Orchard
Service Area: Kitsap County
21 Individuals $53,594
CIAH $0
Funds will be used to pay operations and maintenance costs including salary and benefits of a part time maintenance
staff for the Koinonia Inn transitional housing. Koinonia Inn provides pregnant, parenting, and post-partum women
and their children a safe, stable environment, including case management services, while they participate in
substance abuse treatment and seek permanent housing. All participants are extremely low-income households with
incomes at or below fifty percent (50%) of the area median income.
AGAPE
Sisyphus II Housing Case Management and O&M
Project Type: Service (Operations & Maintenance)
Location: Port Orchard
Service Area: Kitsap County
110 Individuals $90,411
CIAH $0
Funds will be used to pay operations and maintenance costs including salary and benefit costs of part time case
managers and a maintenance staff for Sisyphus II permanent supportive housing. Sisyphus II provides case
management services and a clean and sober living environment for homeless, chronically homeless, low to very low
income, disabled, substance use dependent individuals and their families.
BREMERTON HOUSING AUTHORITY
Evergreen Bright Start Property
Project Type: Housing (New Units)
Location: Bremerton
Service Area: City of Bremerton
30 Units $5,000,000
CIAH, COB HOME
$4,000,000 TOTAL
($3,424,697 CIAH
$575,303 COB
HOME)
Funds requested will be used for the acquisition of a new 30-unit apartment complex which will include 24 affordable
units with wrap around services for vulnerable young adults ages 18 – 24, at or below 30% AMI, with behavioral
health disabilities, homeless or at risk of homelessness including families with children, unaccompanied homeless
young adults, or domestic violence young adult survivors. Two units will be maintained for live-in managers and four
will be for office and service spaces. Rental Assistance and Section 8 Project Based Vouchers will be used to keep the
rents affordable, and BHA will partner with other community organizations for the wrap around services.
EAGLES WINGS COORDINATED CARE
Supportive Housing
Project Type: Service (Rental Assistance and O&M)
Location: Bremerton, Port Orchard, Silverdale
Service Area: Kitsap County
150 Individuals $1,1328,368
CIAH
$245,556
CIAH
Funds will be used to pay for administrative and personnel costs, rental assistance to homeless individuals at or below
30% Area Median Income, and operations and maintenance costs for a building that will provide supportive services
and 8 transitional housing beds and 1 medical respite bed to homeless individuals to stabilize them and assist them in
moving toward more permanent housing.
Exhibit B
FOUNDATION FOR THE CHALLENGED
FFC Home XIII
Project Type: Housing (New Units)
Location: Bremerton
Service Area: Kitsap County
1 Unit (Group Home
serving 3 individuals)
$150,000
CIAH, HOME
$150,000
CIAH
Funds will be used to support the acquisition costs, developer fee, and project management fee for the acquisition
and rehabilitation of a 3-bedroom home in Bremerton. The home will be rehabilitated, used as a group home to
provide affordable, accessible housing to three tenants with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Kitsap Tenant
Support Services will provide the 24/7 day and night supportive services.
HELPLINE HOUSE
Neighbor Helping Neighbor Capital
Campaign
Project Type: Public Facility
Location: Bainbridge Island
Service Area: City of Bainbridge Island
1 Facility
(2,500 individuals)
$300,000
CDBG
$50,000
CDBG
Funds will be used for predevelopment costs including design and engineering to support the construction of a 12,000
square foot community resource center and food bank on the existing site. The new center will address current
limitations with existing facility and greatly expand the agency’s capacity to provide social service programming that
more holistically address growing needs in the community.
HOUSING KITSAP
Almira Affordable Housing
Project Type: Housing (New Units)
Location: Bremerton (Outside the City Limits)
Service Area: Kitsap County
72 Units $350,000
CIAH
$350,000
CIAH
Funds will be used for consultant, architectural and engineering pre-development costs to design a 72+ unit
affordable housing project on a site owned by Housing Kitsap, adjacent to Kitsap Mental Health Services (KMHS). The
design would take the project from concept to building permit ready while Housing Kitsap continues to seek other
funding sources including possible Low Income Housing Tax Credits. This project would be part of a larger project
partnership between Housing Kitsap and KMHS which will include shared roads and utilities for this project and a
KMHS campus expansion.
HOUSING KITSAP
Conifer Woods Exterior Siding and Painting
Project Type: Housing (Rental Rehab)
Location: Port Orchard
Service Area: Kitsap County
72 Units $532,296
CDBG $0
Funds will be used to pay for labor and materials associated with exterior painting and siding repairs at Conifer Woods
Apartments in Port Orchard. The 72-unit complex includes nine 3-story buildings constructed in 1991 serving low-
income families. The property includes 18 Section 8 Project-Based Vouchers units which caps the tenant payment for
rent and utilities to no more than 30% of their income. Housing Kitsap acquired the property in 2006 to preserve the
affordable housing.
HOUSING KITSAP
Home Rehabilitation Program
Project Type: Housing (Homeownership Rehab)
Location: Varies
Service Area: Kitsap County
10 Households $225,000
CDBG
$160,000
CDBG
Funds will be used for personnel, administration, and construction costs associated with the home rehabilitation
program which provides 20-year deferred loans or grants to very-low and extremely low-income homeowners for
repairs to address health, safety, and accessibility issues. Housing Kitsap staff performs the home inspections, creates
a scope of work, assists homeowners with contractor selection, monitors the progress and signs off project
completion and contractor payments.
HOUSING KITSAP
Housing Stabilization
Project Type: Service (Rental Assistance and O&M)
Location: Port Orchard
Service Area: Kitsap County
60 Individuals $250,000
CIAH
$149,810
CIAH
Funds will be used to pay for rental assistance and associated personnel and administrative costs of the Housing
Stabilization Program. The program is designed to promote the economic independence of families. The Program
assists families who are homeless or at-risk of homelessness by helping them access and/or maintain safe, stable, and
affordable housing, providing rental assistance and other supportive services.
HOUSING KITSAP
Madrona Manor Roof Replacement
Project Type: Housing (Rental Rehab)
Location: Silverdale
Service Area: Kitsap County
40 Units $155,000
CDBG
$100,000
CDBG
Funds will be used to pay for construction costs associated with the removal and replacement of the roof including
labor, materials and permits, at Madrona Senior Housing in Port Orchard. The property is a 2-story, 40-unit complex,
constructed in 1997 and serves seniors 55+ with incomes at or below 45% Area Median Income. The roof was
identified as an urgent need in the Physical Needs Assessment completed in April 2022 by a third party.
HOUSING KITSAP
Southern Cross Affordable Housing
Project Type: Housing (New Units)
Location: Bainbridge Island
Service Area: Kitsap County
4 Units $400,000
CIAH, HOME
$400,000
HOME
Funds will be used to pay for construction costs of 4 units of rental housing with Section 8 Project Based Vouchers and
will serve households with incomes between 30% - 50% of Area Median Income. The housing will include 2 single-
family units with attached ADU’s (located in daylight basement). The main house has 3 bedrooms with a 2-bedroom
ADU. The units have separate garages and entrances with no shared space.
HOUSING RESOURCES BAINBRIDGE
Ericksen Affordable Housing
Project Type: Housing (New Units)
Location: Bainbridge Island
Service Area: City of Bainbridge Island
18 Units $2,000,000 CIAH,
HOME, HOME-ARP
$1,947,542 HOME,
HOME-ARP
Funds requested will be used for architect, engineering, and construction costs for the development Ericksen
Apartments, an 18-unit affordable rental housing community on Bainbridge Island. The apartments will be one and
two bedrooms targeted to elderly, veterans, domestic violence survivors, and family household, prioritizing those at
risk of homelessness. The units will serve those with income at or below 50% Area Median Income and there will be
seven project-based Section 8 vouchers prioritized for very low-income households (30% AMI). HRB will also partner
with Helpline House to provide supportive services to the residents.
KITSAP COMMUNITY RESOURCES (KCR)
BE$T Program
Project Type: Microenterprise Business Assistance
Location: Bremerton
Service Area: Kitsap County
24 Individuals $40,000
CDBG
$30,000
CDBG
Funds will be used for staff, program costs, and direct client support costs of the Business, Education, Support &
Training (BE$T) Program which increases economic opportunities for low-income individuals who want to start or
expand their own micro-enterprise business by providing entrepreneurial training, technical assistance, and job
creation through 8-week training classes offered once per quarter. A micro-enterprise business is a business with five
or fewer employees, including the owner.
KITSAP COMMUNITY RESOURCES (KCR)
Weatherization and Minor Home Repair
Project Type: Housing (Homeownership Rehab)
Location: Varies
Service Area: Kitsap County
21 Households $130,000
CDBG
$130,000
CDBG
Funds will be used for contractor labor and materials, program staff wages & benefits, and related support costs for
the Weatherization Program. The Program works with pre-approved Kitsap County contractors to perform
weatherization measures and minor home repair for homeowner and rental households resulting in 30% reduction in
energy usage. The program serves households below 50% Area Median Income with priority given to those with
extremely high housing burden, seniors, disabled persons, and families with children under 19 years of age,
throughout Kitsap County.
KITSAP MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES (KMHS)
ADU Project
Project Type: Housing (New Units)
Location: Bremerton
Service Area: Kitsap County
5 Units $730,415
CIAH
$730,415
CIAH
Funds will be used for the costs associated with purchasing and installing 3 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) on
existing sites owned by Kitsap Mental Health Services in the City of Bremerton. Costs will include the purchase,
equipment and delivery charges, on-site work, permits, taxes, and fees. The ADUs include 1 – one bedroom and 2
double studios to serve 5 single adults with incomes of 30% AMI or less, a mental health diagnosis, and receiving
services from KMHS. Tenants will pay 30% of their income for housing and will work with a housing support specialist
on goals weekly to live independently in these units.
KITSAP MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES
Pendleton Place
Project Type: Service (Operations & Maintenance)
Location: Bremerton
Service Area: Kitsap County
72 Individuals $1,029,000
CIAH
$699,522
CIAH
Funds will be used to pay a portion of operations and maintenance which includes the personnel and administrative
costs of providing 24/7 on-site staff at Pendleton Place, a permanent supportive housing complex serving individuals
with chronic/severe mental illness and/or substance use disorders who also have a documented history of chronic
homelessness. KMHS staff offer tenancy supports to all residents including life skills (budgeting, cooking, cleaning,
etc.). All tenants have housing stability plans including referrals to community resources.
PENINSULA COMMUNITY HEALTH
Medical Respite Facility
Project Type: Public Facility
Location: Bremerton
Service Area: Kitsap County
1 Facility
(670 individuals)
$1,500,000
CIAH
$1,500,0000
CIAH
Funds will be used for tenant improvement costs, furnishings, and IT costs for the 22-bed medical respite center
building renovation in downtown Bremerton. The facility will serve homeless patients from throughout the county
and will provide 24/7 support for up to 30 days for patients recuperating from an acute illness or injury and develop
individual exit plans, enabling safe transition to more stable environments. It will include an onsite medical and
behavioral health clinic, along with nutrition support, medication management, and community resource
coordination.
PENINSULA COMMUNITY HEALTH
Sage Apartments
Project Type: Housing (New Units)
Location: Bremerton
Service Area: Bremerton
29 Units $2,000,000
CIAH $0
Funds will be used for completion of the partially constructed Sage Apartments, a 29-unit studio apartment building
which includes two ground-level ADA accessible units. When completed, each studio unit of approximately 385
square feet will include an open living space/bedroom, bathroom, kitchen space, and closet with in-unit washer and
dryer, along with a balcony. The units will be prioritized for healthcare workforce housing across multiple income
brackets with 50% of the units targeted towards households with incomes below 60% AMI. The project will utilize a
mix of unit-based vouchers and voucher holders as appropriate by the voucher-issuing agency.
POSTPARTUM MAMAS
Postpartum Mamas
Project Type: Service (Rental Assistance and O&M)
Location: Bremerton
Service Area: Kitsap County
50 Individuals $290,000
CIAH $0
Funds will be used to pay for rental assistance to clients and operations and maintenance including personnel,
administrative and programming costs associated with the program which provides mental health support groups to
mothers, in person and via zoom, experiencing depression, postpartum depression, anxiety, infertility, domestic
violence, single-parenting and all related motherhood struggles in a safe and confidential environment.
SOUTH KITSAP HELPLINE
Expanded Food Distribution Site
Project Type: Public Facility
Location: Port Orchard
Service Area: South Kitsap
1 Facility
(6,000 individuals)
$800,000
CDBG
$222,924
CDBG
Funds will be used for a portion of the concrete costs for the new construction of a modernized food bank and multi-
service center in South Kitsap County, to replace the existing outdated facility. The new facility will serve all South
Kitsap and will allow the agency to expand outreach to address the nutritional and deeper stability needs of people
who are unhoused, experiencing poverty, and facing emergency situations.
2024 CDBG Project Review Committee Funding Reccomendations Project DescriptionsCDBG STAFF ADMINISTRATION FUNDING MICROENTERPRISE FUNDINGKitsap Community Resources: Business Education Support and TrainingCDBG CAPITAL FUNDING WEATHERIZATION AND MINOR HOME REPAIRKitsap Community Resources‐Weatherization and Minor Home Repair$1Funds will be used to provide weatherization and minor home repair services for a minimum of 8 homes within the City of Bremerton. The funds will specifically be used for contractor labor and materials to install weatherization measures such as surface insulation (attics, walls, floors, and heating ducts), energy efficient heat systems, priority air sealing, and installation of ventilation. Funds will also be used to achieve additional home repairs such as roofing, plumbing, and electrical repairs necessary to ensure the preservation of installed measures. Health and safety improvements will also be prioritized, including shower grab bars, slips trips and falls, and wheelchair ramps. Grant administration is the general management and coordination of the CDBG/HOME programs, including federal regulation compliance, annual monitoring, citizen participation and development of other sources of funding for community development. 20% of our CDBG entitlement plus program income may be used for planning and administrative costs to deliver the CDBG program requirements. Those funds not being used for administration and planning purposes will be rolled into project use. The BE$T program is designed for low‐income individuals and those with limited funds who are interested in mastering the skills necessary to start or expand their own business. Program‐wide BE$T plans to provide our Business Basics training to 48 unduplicated individuals during the year; have 30 businesses started, host at least 10 workshops/networking events and create 20 new jobs while retaining 8. With the use of CDBG funds the program helps new businesses (1) Develop their business concept; (2) Define and understand their target customer base; (3) Learn about money management and break‐even point analysis; (4) Study cash flow, pricing, taxes and financial statements; (5) Learn how to set up operations including legal structure; (6) Design a marketing and sales plan; and (7) Develop their own basic business plan.In addition to the eight week business training program, BE$T offers ongoing support for their graduates.Bremerton Public Works‐Pedestrian Priority Network Infrastructure ImprovementsThis project will create 8 new curb ramps and 2 ADA compiant alley driveways along 15th St and 440 lineal feet of sidewalk along N Lafayette Ave., building upon the ADA accessible infrastructure in previous CDBG awards including the planned improvements to Haddon Park. In alignment with the City's ADA transition plan and goals, this project will improve ADA access to transit, city parks, schools, and improve walkability for pedestrians by removing barriers for those with disabilities, and provide connected corridors for foot traffic. Exhibit C
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Proposed Public Hearing on Revenue
Sources for the 2024 City of Bremerton
Budget
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: Financial Services
Presenter: Karen Wikle/Mike Riley
Phone: (360) 473-5296
SUMMARY: Tonight’s public hearing is to take comments on the revenue sources for the 2024
Proposed Budget. The proposed budget anticipates property and EMS levy increases of the full 1%
allowed by law, leaves utility tax rates unchanged. The proposed budget also adjusts for the increase
to the B&O tax exemption rate to $1,040,000 and includes interfund transfers between funds where
appropriate. Overall, the revenue projections throughout all funds remain conservative
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Revenue Sources
The 2024 Proposed Budget may be found on the City’s website at:
www.BremertonWA.gov/2024budget
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount):
Total proposed general fund revenue, without beginning fund balance, is $52,953,160.
With beginning fund balance, total general fund revenue is $69,749,036.
Total proposed revenue city wide, without beginning fund balance, is $152,595,371.
With beginning fund balance, total revenue city wide is $227,229,747.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ Limited Presentation ☐ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Open Hearing for Public Comment.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 01/02/2018
A8
BEG LIC.INTER-CHARGES FINES 2023
FUND AND GOV'T FOR AND OTHER TOTAL
FUND BAL.TAXES PERMITS REVENUE SERVICE FORFEITS REVENUE BUDGET
General Fund
General Government:
City Council 0 0 0 176,032 0 0 176,032
Executive 0 0 0 220,208 0 0 220,208
Financial Services 0 0 0 893,686 0 0 893,686
Legal 0 0 0 742,670 0 0 742,670
Human Resources 0 0 0 353,819 0 0 353,819
Community Development 3,265,000 1,250,750 75,000 679,550 20,000 0 5,290,300
Municipal Court 0 0 100,000 189,260 146,550 10,300 446,110
City Auditor 0 0 0 57,133 0 0 57,133
Law Enforcement 0 3,910 888,151 357,500 1,000 20,000 1,270,561
Fire/Emergency Medical 2,200,000 800 800,554 650,150 0 0 3,651,504
Police & Fire Pension 0 0 100,671 0 0 0 100,671
General Facilities 0 0 0 194,442 0 677,500 871,942
Parks 0 0 0 184,200 0 70,000 254,200
Engineering 0 100,000 0 3,111,501 0 0 3,211,501
Non-Departmental 31,751,715 32,000 1,834,270 257,838 700,000 837,000 35,412,823
Beginning Fund Balance 16,795,876 16,795,876
Total General Fund 16,795,876 37,216,715 1,387,460 3,798,646 8,067,989 867,550 1,614,800 69,749,036
Special Revenue Funds:
Street 387,953 780,000 0 820,000 98,000 0 1,522,000 3,607,953
Contingency Reserve 1,951,802 0 0 0 0 0 160,000 2,111,802
Lodging Tax 823,487 755,000 0 0 0 0 15,000 1,593,487
Parking System 381,892 0 0 0 0 410,500 1,613,358 2,405,750
Comm. Dev. Block Grant 212,000 0 0 500,000 5,000 0 90,500 807,500
Abatement Revolving Fund 444,783 0 0 0 0 50,000 15,000 509,783
Police Special Projects 763,562 0 0 0 0 0 20,000 783,562
Public Access Television 497,991 0 230,000 0 162,521 0 81,500 972,012
Gift & Donations Fund 95,160 0 0 0 0 0 5,000 100,160
Trial Improvement 103,362 0 0 22,000 0 0 3,000 128,362
One Percent for Arts 8,393 0 0 0 0 0 100 8,493
Conference Center Oper 218,267 0 0 0 1,225,588 0 460,000 1,903,855
Total Spec. Rev. Funds 5,888,651 1,535,000 230,000 1,342,000 1,491,109 460,500 3,985,458 14,932,718
Debt Service Fund:
2010 UTGO 94,865 900,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 997,865
Government Center LTGO 87,393 0 0 0 0 0 332,000 419,393
2015 Public Safety Bond 240,853 550,000 0 0 0 0 7,000 797,853
2019 Refunding LTGO 67,717 330,000 0 3,500 0 0 147,000 548,217
Total Debt Service Fund 490,827 1,780,000 0 3,500 0 0 489,000 2,763,327
Capital Improvement Funds:
General Govt Capital Improv. 6,229,098 1,500,000 0 0 0 0 250,000 7,979,098
Park Facilities Construction 367,065 0 0 0 0 0 137,000 504,065
Residential Street & Sidewalk Fund 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Transportation Projects Fund 1,551,029 1,850,900 175,000 7,183,963 0 0 1,763,269 12,524,161
Fire Public Safety Capital 6,385 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,385
Affordable Housing Capital Fund 79,791 0 0 1,100,000 0 0 103,000 1,282,791
Total Capital Improv. Funds 8,233,368 3,350,900 175,000 8,283,963 0 0 2,253,269 22,296,500
Total General Gov't Funds 31,408,722 43,882,615 1,792,460 13,428,109 9,559,098 1,328,050 8,342,527 109,741,581
2024 REVENUE - ALL FUNDS
BEG LIC.INTER-CHARGES FINES 2023
FUND AND GOV'T FOR AND OTHER TOTAL
FUND BAL.TAXES PERMITS REVENUE SERVICE FORFEITS REVENUE BUDGET
2024 REVENUE - ALL FUNDS
Enterprise Funds:
Water Utility 2,278,981 0 0 0 16,069,040 13,000 606,000 18,967,021
Water Capital 10,740,300 0 0 0 0 0 5,222,561 15,962,861
Wastewater Utility 2,459,405 0 0 0 18,650,500 15,000 27,000 21,151,905
Wastewater Capital 12,109,408 0 0 127,933 0 0 8,643,856 20,881,197
Stormwater Utility 805,303 0 0 40,000 6,248,500 6,000 81,000 7,180,803
Stormwater Capital 6,174,189 0 0 550,000 0 0 1,310,000 8,034,189
Utility Debt Reserve 1,712,238 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,712,238
Gold Mountain Golf Complex 2,576,072 0 0 0 6,351,792 0 66,000 8,993,864
Total Enterprise Funds 38,855,896 0 0 717,933 47,319,832 34,000 15,956,417 102,884,078
Internal Service Funds:
Risk Management 582,915 0 0 0 0 0 3,864,844 4,447,759
Employment Security 317,717 0 0 0 0 0 41,000 358,717
Accumulated Leave Liability 1,185,949 0 0 0 0 0 382,000 1,567,949
ER&R Operations & Maint. (47,795)0 0 0 2,297,107 0 1,950 2,251,262
ER&R Equipment Reserve 1,819,298 0 0 0 0 0 1,456,308 3,275,606
Information Services 511,673 0 0 0 2,155,821 0 35,300 2,702,794
Total Internal Service Funds 4,369,757 0 0 0 4,452,928 0 5,781,402 14,604,087
Total Business Type Funds 43,225,654 0 0 717,933 51,772,760 34,000 21,737,819 117,488,165
Total All Funds 74,634,376 43,882,615 1,792,460 14,146,042 61,331,858 1,362,050 30,080,346 227,229,747
Beginning Fund
Balance
$74,634,376
33%
Taxes
$43,882,615
19%
Licenses & Permits
$1,792,460
1%
Intergovernmental
$14,146,042
6%
Charges for Service
$61,331,858
27%
Fines & Forfeits
$1,362,050
1%Other Revenue
$30,080,346
13%
Revenue Sources - All Funds
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Ordinance to amend and re-establish City
Rates and Fees for 2024
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: All
Presenter: Mike Riley
Phone: (360) 473-5303
SUMMARY: Each year, as part of the budget process, the various City departments review their
charges, rates and fees for services and make recommendations on any changes needed. The
attached included recommended changes to fees charged by the various departments.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance No. ______; and 2) Exhibit A
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Impacts to revenues are dependent on the
demand for services. The 2024 proposed budget does anticipate the approval of the ordinance and
related rate tables.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☐ Limited Presentation ☒ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☒ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to pass Ordinance No. ____ amending and re-establishing City Rates and Fees for 2024.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 01/02/2018
A9
Page 1 of 2
2024 Rates & Fees
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, amending and reestablishing rates and fees
for services established in Ordinance No. 5460 relating to Animal
Control, Bremerton Kitsap Access Television (“BKAT”),
Department of Community Development, Department of Financial
Services, Fire Department, Gold Mountain Golf Course, Ivy Green
Cemetery, Kitsap Conference Center, Municipal Court, Parking,
Parks and Recreation Department, Police Department, Public
Records, Department of Public Works and Utilities, Tax & License,
Telecommunications, Transportation Benefit District, and other
related services.
WHEREAS, the City Council, by this ordinance, desires to amend and reestablish
the rates and fees established in Ordinance No. 5460; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Rate Tables Amended and Reestablished. The rates and fees
relating to Animal Control, Bremerton Kitsap Access Television (“BKAT”), Department of
Community Development, Department of Financial Services, Fire Department, Gold Mountain
Golf Course, Ivy Green Cemetery, Kitsap Conference Center, Municipal Court, Parking, Parks
and Recreation Department, Police Department, Public Records, Department of Public Works
and Utilities, Tax & License, Telecommunications, Transportation Benefit District, and other
related services, as set forth in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 5460, are hereby amended and
reestablished in their entirety as set forth in the attached Exhibit A of this ordinance, said
exhibit is incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. Rate Tables - Effective Date. The amendment and
reestablishment of rate tables as set forth in Section 1 above shall be effective January 1, 2024.
SECTION 3. Corrections. The City Clerk and codifiers of this ordinance are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the
correction of scrivener, clerical, typographical, and spelling errors, references, ordinance
numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto.
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.
Page 2 of 2
2024 Rates & Fees
PASSED by the City Council the___________ day of November, 2023.
_________________________________
JEFF COUGHLIN, Council President
Approved this ________ day of November, 2023.
_________________________________
GREG WHEELER, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________ ________________________________
ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk KYLIE FINNELL, City Attorney
PUBLISHED the ________ day of ______________________, 2023.
EFFECTIVE the ________ day of ______________________, 2023.
ORDINANCE NO. ________.
2023 RATES & FEES2024
RATES & FEES
City of Bremerton
Ordinance No. 5460
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Rate Table Page
ANIMAL CONTROL ........................................................................................... 1
BREMERTON KITSAP ACCESS TELEVISION (BKAT) ............................................. 2
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .............................................. 3
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES ............................................................ 11
FIRE DEPARTMENT ........................................................................................... 12
GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COURSE ..................................................................... 14
IVY GREEN CEMETERY ...................................................................................... 15
KITSAP CONFERENCE CENTER .......................................................................... 16
MUNICIPAL COURT .......................................................................................... 17
PARKING .......................................................................................................... 18
PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT ............................................................... 20
POLICE DEPARTMENT ...................................................................................... 26
PUBLIC RECORDS ............................................................................................. 27
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS & UTILITIES ................................................. 28
TAX & LICENSE ................................................................................................. 29
TELECOMMUNICATIONS .................................................................................. 30
TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT…………………………………………………………….31
2023 Rates & Fees 1 | P a g e
TABLE A ANIMAL CONTROL FEES
1. Licenses for Dogs and Cats
a) For Each Cat Spayed or Neutered (Upon Proof of Spaying or Neutering)
Annual $7.507.00
3-Years $15.00
Lifetime $25.00
b) For Each Dog Spayed or Neutered (Upon Proof of Spaying or Neutering)
Annual $12.5012.00
3-Year $25.00
Lifetime $45.00
c) For Each Cat Not Spayed or Neutered $37.5040.00
d) For Each Dog Not Spayed or Neutered $37.5050.00
e) Senior Citizen Permanent Dog/Cat $12.5012.00
f) Replacement Tag $1.003.00
g) Additional License Fee (for late renewal) $10.00
2. License for Chickens
a) Annually up to five (5) chickens $12.5028.00
b) Senior permanent for up to five (5) chickens $12.5028.00
3. Impound and Redemption Fees - Domestic Animals
a) Impound $45.00
b) Vaccination $45.00
c) Boarding (per day) $20.00
d) Medical care Case dependent
e) Microchip $30.00
4. Impound and Redemption Fees - Livestock
a) Impound $60.00
b) Boarding (per day) $40.00
c) Medical care Case dependent
d) Special Transportation fee $120.00
2 | P a g e
TABLE B BREMERTON KITSAP ACCESS TELEVISION (BKAT)
1. PRE-PRODUCTION (STANDARD RATE)
a) Equipment Consultation $109.00/hour
b) Program Development $109.00/hour
c) Research $109.00/hour
d) Location Scout (RT travel billed separately) $109.00/hour
e) Scripting $109.00/hour
f) Graphics Development $109.00/hour
2. PRODUCTION (STANDARD RATE)*
a) Set-up, Shooting, Breakdown $109.00/hour
b) Production $109.00/hour
c)b) BreakdownTravel (portal to portal) $109.00/hour
*minimum of 2 hours for any productionsProduction at Standard Rate applies to qualified remote meeting
location/client-owned equipment or zoom coverage for government meetings with 1 staff onsite, 1 staff
on call or rate for BKAT studio production
3. PRODUCTION (FIELD RATE)
a) BKAT-owned equipment, 1 staff filming onsite $130.00/hour
b) BKAT-owned equipment with crew of 2-5 filming onsite $ $183.00/hour
LIVE STREAM SURCHARGE
(Support & Data Costs) $27.60/hour
Live stream surcharge applies to live field productions only
WEEKEND/HOLIDAY SURCHARGE
(Friday after 5pm, Saturday, Sunday or Holiday
Multiplied by applicable Standard and/or Field Production rates 1.5 x rate/hour
3.4. POST PRODUCTION
a) Edit $109.00/hour
b) Voice Over $109.00/hour
b)c) File processing, Playback Scheduling, Indexing, Archiving $109.00/hour
4.5. BKAT MEMBER TRAINING
a) Studio - 3 hours of camera and director training – max 4 people No Charge
b) Edit – First 3 hours No Charge
Additional hours $109.00/hour
5.6. MISCELLANEOUS
a) Cancellation fee (equivalent of 2 hour minimum charge)Studio rental for non-members
$109.00/hour218.00
a)b) 32 GB thumb drive for video storage $5.00 each
BKAT Staff as crew Additional $109.00/hour
2023 Rates & Fees 3 | P a g e
6.7. MEMBERSHIP (ANNUAL)
a) Individual Resident (within Kitsap County) $25.00
b) Individual Non-Resident $50.00
c) Organization – Resident (within Kitsap County) $75.00
d) Organization – Non-Resident $150.00
8. 7. PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT
BKAT will produce a non—commercial PSA (subject to BKAT guidelines found in the current BKAT
Policy Handbook) with or without voiceover to . The public service announcement will air on BKAT
for a minimum of two weeks. Client receives a digital copy for their own purposes.
$109.00/hour
9. PUBLIC RECORDS DUPLICATION
a) Duplicate video tape to DVD (time dependent on meeting length) $109.00/hour
b) Duplicate video tape to digital downloadable file
(time dependent on meeting length plus conversion process) $109.00/hour
c) Duplicate DVD to digital downloadable file
(time dependent on conversion process) $109.00/hour
4 | P a g e
TABLE C DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
1. CODE ENFORCEMENT
a) ABATEMENTS
Dangerous Building $900 + Direct Service and Supply Cost
Garbage & Weed $640 + Direct Service and Supply Cost
b) ABANDONED PROPERTY FINES & PENALTIES
Failure to Register $1,000 + $100 per day
Failure to Inspect, Maintain, and/or Secure $1,000 + $100 per day
c) RENTAL PROPERTY REGISTRATION FINES & PENALTIES
Failure to Register and File a Declaration of Compliance as Required
$1,000 + $100 per day
Failure to Obtain a Certificate of Inspection When Required
$1,000 + $100 per day
2. PLANNING
a) SUBDIVISIONS
Boundary Line Adjustment $365
Preliminary Short $1000 + $150/lot
Preliminary Formal Plat/Binding Site Plan $2500 (base) + per lot
1-100 lots $150/lot
101-200 lots $100/lot
201 + lots $75/lot
Final Short $630 + $40/lot
Final Formal Plat/Binding Site Plan $945 + 40/lot
Minor Amendment $630 (no lot fee)
Extension $630 (no lot fee)
b) SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM
Substantial Development Permit $1300
Conditional Use Permit – Type II $850
Conditional Use Permit – Type III $1750
Shoreline Variance $1750
Permit Revision $325
Shoreline Exemption $100
c) STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA)
Checklist $320
Environmental Impact Statement Review/Adoption $650 +
additional cost of expertise
2023 Rates & Fees 5 | P a g e
d) PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE $100
e) ZONING ORDINANCE
Ordinance Amendments
Text $740
Rezone (Map Amendment) $740
Variance
Administrative $325
Public Hearing/Single Family $500
Public Hearing/Other $1750
Development Agreements $1600
Conditional Use Permit
Single Family Residential Type II $350
Single Family Residential Type III $500
Commercial / Non-Residential / Multifamily – Type II $850
Commercial / Non-Residential / Multifamily – Type III $1750
Non-Conforming Use Determination $275
Director’s Code Interpretation $175
Zoning Code Verification Hourly Rate
f) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Text or Map Amendment $1500
Combined Text and Map Amendment $2500
g) MULTIFAMILY TAX EXEMPTION
Application $1500
h) DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Conceptual Design Conference $500
Design Response Conference $500
i) CRITICAL AREA REVIEW Hourly Rate
(Dangerous trees, tree removal in sloped area, etc.)
j) FORESTRY Hourly Rate
Conversion Harvest Option Plan
3. MISCELLANEOUS FEES
a) APPEAL (to Hearing Examiner) $350
b) Hourly Rate $73.00
c) Technology Surcharge on Permits 5% of Permit Fee
(Permit Surcharge Levied on Fees Noted with *)
d) Third-Party Technical Review and Verification Actual Cost
(Geotechnical Evaluation, Habitat Review, Structural Engineering Review, Etc.)
6 | P a g e
4. SITE DEVELOPMENT
a) SITE PLAN REVIEW
Commercial / Non-Residential / Multifamily – Type II $1,000
b) SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT* $1,000
c) GRADING PERMIT AND PLAN REVIEW FEES* Refer to Exhibit 4
5. BUILDING
a) CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY $73.00
b) BUILDING PERMIT FEES* Refer to Exhibit 1
c) BUILDING PLAN REVIEW FEE 65% of the building permit fee as set forth in Exhibit 1
d) ESTABLISHED “BASIC” PLAN REVIEW 50% of Plan Review Fee
Pursuant to DCD policy
e) BUILDING PERMIT FEE FOR REROOF* Valuation and Refer to Exhibit 1
f) MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES*
Residential Refer to Exhibit 2
Commercial / Non-Residential / Multifamily Valuation and Refer to Exhibit 1
g) PLUMBING PERMIT FEES*
Residential Refer to Exhibit 3
Commercial / Non-Residential / Multifamily Valuation and Refer to Exhibit 1
h) Stop Work Fee 100% of permit fee
2023 Rates & Fees 7 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 1
BUILDING AND OTHER PERMIT FEES
TOTAL VALUATION1 FEE
$1.00 TO $500.00 $35.00
$501.00 TO $2,000.00 $35.00 for the first $500.00 plus $3.00 for each additional $100.00, or
fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00
$2,001.00 to $40,000 $80.00 for the first $2,000.00 plus $11.00 for each additional $1,000.00,
or fraction thereof, to and including $40,000
$40,001.00 to $100,000.00 $498.00 for the first $40,000; plus $9.00 for each additional $1,000.00,
or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00
$100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $1,038.00 for the first $100,000.00 plus $7.00 for each additional
$1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00
$500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $3,838.00for the first $500,000.00 plus $5.00 for each additional
$1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00
$1,000,001.00 to 5,000,000.00 $6,338.00 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $3.00 for each additional
$1,000.00, or fraction thereof, to include $5,000,000.00
$5,000,001.00 and over $18,338.00 for the first $5,000,000.00; plus $1.00 for each additional
$1,000.00 or fraction thereof
Other Inspections and fees:
1. Inspections outside of normal business hours (minimum
charge – two hours)
Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
2. Re-inspection fees assessed under provisions of this
chapter shall be as follows (per inspection):
Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated
(minimum charge – one-half hour)
Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
4. Additional plan review required by changes, additions or
revisions to plans (minimum charge – one-half hour)
Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
5. For use of outside consultants for plan checking and
inspections, or both
Actual Costs2
6. Manufactured Home Setup Fee Foundation Bid Price valuation used in Exhibit 1
7. Moved Building Permit Fee (not including other
required permits)
$100.00
8. Demolition permit Fee: 3 cents per square foot, with a
minimum charge of
$100.00
9. Energy Code Plan Review Surcharge for New Single
Family Residences
$50.00
1 Valuation includes fair market value of labor and materials.
2 Actual costs include administrative and overhead costs.
8 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 2
MECHANICAL PERMIT FEES
Permit Issuance and Heaters Fee
1. For the issuance of each mechanical permit $25.00
2. For issuing each supplemental permit for which the original permit has not expired, been
canceled or finaled $7.25
Unit Fee Schedule (Note: The following do not include permit-issuing fee)
1. Furnaces
For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type furnace or burner,
including ducts and vents attached to such appliance, up to and including 100,000 Btu/h
(29.3 kW) $14.80
For the installation or relocation of each forced-air or gravity-type furnace or burner,
including ducts and vents attached to such appliance over 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) $18.20
For the installation or relocation of each floor furnace, including vent $14.80
For the installation or relocation of each suspended heater, recessed wall heater or floor -
mounted unit heater $14.80
2. Appliance Vents
For the installation, relocation or replacement of each appliance vent installed and not
included in an appliance permit $7.25
3. Repairs or Additions
For the repair of, alteration of, or addition to each heating appliance, refrigeration unit,
cooling unit, absorption unit, or each heating, cooling, absorption or evaporative cooling
system, including installation of controls regulated by the Mechanical Code $13.70
4. Boilers, Compressors and Absorption Systems
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor to and including 3
horsepower (10.6 kW), or each absorption system to and including 100,000 Btu/h (29.3 kW) $14.70
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over three horsepower (10.6
kW) to and including 15 horsepower (52.7 kW), or each absorption system over 100,000
Btu/h (29.3 kW) to and including 500,000 Btu/h (146.6 kW) $27.15
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 15 horsepower (52.7
kW) to and including 30 horsepower (105.5 kW), or each absorption system over 500,000
Btu/h (146.6 kW) to and including 1,000,000 Btu/h (293.1 kW) $37.20
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 30 horsepower (105.5
kW) to and including 50 horsepower (176 kW), or each absorption system over 1,000,000
Btu/h (293.1 kW) to and including 1,750,000 Btu/h (512.9 kW) $55.45
For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 50 horsepower (176
kW), or each absorption system over 1,750,000 Btu/h (512.9 kW) $92.65
5. Air Handlers
For each air-handling unit to and including 10,000 cubic feet per minute (cfm) (4719 L/s),
including ducts attached thereto
Note: This fee does not apply to an air-handling unit which is a portion of a factory-
assembled appliance, cooling unit, evaporative cooler or absorption unit for which a permit
is required elsewhere in the Mechanical Code $10.65
2023 Rates & Fees 9 | P a g e
For each air-handling unit over 10,000 cfm (4719 :s) $18.10
6. Evaporative Coolers
For each evaporative cooler other than portable type $10.65
7. Ventilation and Exhaust
For each ventilation fan connected to a single duct $7.25
For each ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air-conditioning system
authorized by a permit $10.65
For the installation of each hood which is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts
for such hood $10.65
8. Incinerators
For the installation or relocation of each domestic-type incinerator $18.20
For the installation or relocation of each commercial or industrial-type incinerator $14.50
9. Miscellaneous
For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by the Mechanical Code but not classed
in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed in the table $10.65
For each gas piping system $10.00
Other Inspections and Fees
Inspections outside of normal business hours, per
hour (minimum charge – two hours Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
Re-inspection fees assessed under provisions of this
chapter shall be as follows (per inspection): Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated,
per hour (minimum charge – one-half hour) Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
Additional plan review required by changes,
additions or revisions to plans or to plans for which
an initial review has been completed (minimum
charge – one-half hour) Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
10 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 3
PLUMBING PERMIT FEES
Permit Issuance
1. For issuing each permit $25.00
2. For issuing each supplemental permit $10.00
Unit Fee Schedule (in addition to items 1 and 2 above)
1. For each plumbing fixture on one trap or a set of fixtures on one trap (including
water, drainage piping and backflow protection therefore) $7.00
2. For each building sewer and each trailer park sewer $15.00
3. Rainwater systems – per drain (inside building) $7.00
4. For each cesspool (where permitted) $25.00
5. For each private sewage disposal system $40.00
6. For each water heater and/or vent $7.00
7. For each gas piping system $10.00
8. For each industrial waste pretreatment interceptor including its trap and vent,
except kitchen-type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps $7.00
9. For each installation, alteration or repair of water piping and/or water treating
equipment, each $7.00
10. For each repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping, each fixture $7.00
11. For each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter including backflow protection
devices therefore $7.00
12. For atmospheric-type vacuum breakers not included in item 12:
1 to 5 $5.00
Over 5, each $1.00
13. For each backflow protective device other than atmospheric type vacuum
breakers:
2 inch (51 mm) diameter and smaller $7.00
Over 2 inch (51 mm) diameter $15.00
14. For each graywater system $40.00
15. For initial installation and testing for a reclaimed water system $30.001
16. For each annual cross-connection testing of a reclaimed water system (excluding
initial test ) $30.001
17. For each medical gas piping system serving one to five inlet(s)/outlet(s) for a
specific gas $50.00
18. For each additional medical gas inlet(s)/outlet(s) $5.00
Other Inspections and Fees
1. Inspections outside of normal business hours Hourly rate per Rate Table C –
Miscellaneous Fees
2. Re-inspection fee Hourly rate per Rate Table C –
Miscellaneous Fees
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated Hourly rate per Rate Table C –
Miscellaneous Fees
4. Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions
to approved plans (minimum charge – one-half hour)
Hourly rate per Rate Table C –
Miscellaneous Fees
2023 Rates & Fees 11 | P a g e
EXHIBIT 4
GRADING PLAN REVIEW FEES
50 cubic yards (38.2 m3) or less No fee
51 to 100 cubic yards (40 m3 to 76.5 m3) $23.50
101 to 1,000 cubic yards (77.2 m3 to 764.6 m3) $37.00
1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards (765.3 m3 to 7645.5 m3) $49.25
10,001 100,000 cubic yards (7646.3 m3 to 76,455 m3) $49.25 for the first 10,000 cubic yards
(7645.5 m3), plus $24.50 for each
additional 10,000 cubic yards (7645.5
m3) or fraction thereof
100,001 to 200,000 cubic yards (76,456 m3 to 152,911 m3) $269.75 for the first 100,000 cubic yards
(76,455 m3), plus $13.25 for each
additional 10,000 cubic yards (7645.5
m3) or fraction thereof
200,001 cubic yards (152,912 m3) or more $402.25 for the first 200,000 cubic yards
(152,911 m3), plus $7.25 for each
additional 10,000 cubic yards (7645.5
m3) or fraction thereof
Other Fees:
Additional plan review required by changes, additions or
revisions to approved plans (minimum charge – one-half
hour)
Hourly rate per Rate Table C –
Miscellaneous Fees
GRADING PERMIT FEES1
50 cubic yards (38.2 m3) or less $23.50
51 to 100 cubic yards (40 m3 to 76.5 m3) $37.00
101 to 1,000 cubic yards (77.2 m3 to 764.6 m3) $37.00 for the first 100 cubic yards (76.5 m3)
plus $17.50 for each additional 100 cubic
yards (76.5 m3) or fraction thereof
1,001 to 10,000 cubic yards (765.3 m3 to 7645.5 m3) $194.50 for the first 1,000 cubic yards
(764.6 m3), plus $14.50 for each additional
1,000 cubic yards (764.6 m3) or fraction
thereof
10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards (7646.3 m3 to 76,455 m3) $325.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards (7645.5
m3), plus $66.00 for each additional 10,000
cubic yards (7645.5 m3) or fraction thereof
100,001 cubic yards (76,456 m3) or more $919.00 for the first 100,000 cubic yards (76,455
m3), plus $36.50 for each additional 10,000
cubic yards (7645.5 m3) or fraction thereof
Other Inspections and Fees:
1. Inspections outside of normal business hours
(minimum charge – two hours) Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
2. Re-inspection fees assessed under provisions
of this chapter shall be as follows (per
inspection): Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically
indicated (minimum charge – one-half hour) Hourly rate per Rate Table C – Miscellaneous Fees
1The fee for a grading permit authorizing additional work to that under a valid permit shall be the difference between the fee paid for the original
permit and the fee shown for the entire project.
12 | P a g e
TABLE D DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
1. CHECK HANDLING FEE $40.00
2023 Rates & Fees 13 | P a g e
TABLE E FIRE DEPARTMENT
1. REGULATORY LICENSE FEES
a) BMC 9.48 Fireworks Stands / Displays $100/stand/year
b) BMC 9.48.020(9) Cash Bond
Fireworks Stand Clean-Up (refundable) $50/stand/year
Citywide Fireworks Clean-up Fee (non-refundable) $50/stand/year
c) BMC 18.06
Ambulance Services $75.00/vehicle
Ambulance Inspections $75.00/vehicle
2. AMBULANCE TRANSPORT FEE
a) ALS—1 $791.00953.00
b) ALS – 2 $884.001082.00
c) BLSE $620.00758.00
d) Mileage $16.8018.00/mile
e) Itemized EMS Fees (one charge per transport)
ECG $70.00
IV/10 $50.00
O2 $50.00
SPO2 $15.00
CSPINE $40.00
End Tidal CO2 $30.00
C-PAP $175.00
3. EMS SERVICE CALL TO ASSISTED LIVING, LONG TERM CARE AND ADULT CARE FACILITIES
$100$500 After first response per quarter
4. RE-INSPECTION FEE $73.00
5. HAZARD MATERIALS RESPONSE
a) Rice Hull Ash Actual Cost per Bag
b) Absorbent Pads Actual Cost per Bag
6. STAND-BY-TIME
a) Fire Engine w/Crew of 2 $155.001 + $150.00 = $305.00/hour
b) Fire Engine w/Crew of 3 $155.001 + $225.00 = $380.00/hour
c) Fire Engine w/Crew of 4 $155.001 + $300.00 = $455.00/hour
7. ACTIVE FIREFIGHTING
a) Fire Engine Washington Fire Chiefs Published Rate 1
b) Aerial Ladder Washington Fire Chiefs Published Rate 1
1Washington Fire Chiefs Association Wage & Equipment Rates for the Washington State Fire Service
14 | P a g e
8. FIRE WATCH $75.00$100/hour
9. AFTER HOURS INSPECTION $75.00$100/hour – 2 hour Minimum
10. RUSH PLAN REVIEW $500.00$100/hour – 2 hour
Minimum plus Standard Fees
11. OPERATIONAL PERMIT $100.00
12. FIRE SAFETY OFFICERS $75.00$100/hour – 2 hour minimum
13. FALSE FIRE ALARM $200.00
2023 Rates & Fees 15 | P a g e
TABLE F GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COURSE
1. CASCADE COURSE (prices do not include sales tax)
a) Friday 18 Holes $46.00$52.00
b) Weekday 18 Holes (Mon-Thurs) $42.00$48.00
c) Weekend/Holiday 18 Holes (Note: 1) $55.00$58.00
d) Weekday 9 Holes (Mon-Thurs) $30.00$34.00
e) Weekend/Holiday 9 Holes $32.00$34.00
f) Continuation Fee $32.00
g) Twilight Weekday (Mon-Thurs) $30.00
h) Twilight Weekend/Holiday $32.00$34.00
i) League Rate (Not Sat, Sun or Holiday) $26.00
j) Junior 18 Holes (Mon-Thurs) $18.00
k) Junior Twilight Weekend/Holiday $18.00
l) 36 Hole Special (Mon-Thurs) $95.00
m) 36 Hole Special (Fri-Sun) $110.00
n) Senior Punch Card (Not Sat, Sun or Holiday) (Note: 2) $280.00
o) Regular 10 Round Punch Card $320.00
p) Junior 10 Round Punch Card $130.00
q) Low Income Sr. Punch Card (Not Sat, Sun or Holiday) (Note: 2) $130.00
r) Daily Private Cart $20.00$22.00
s) Shotgun Tournament (Not To Exceed 18 Hole Green Fee) $85.00
2. OLYMPIC COURSE (prices do not include sales tax)
a) Friday 18 Holes $75.00$81.00
b) Weekday 18 Holes (Mon-Thurs) $62.00$72.00
c) Weekend/Holiday 18 Holes (Note: 1) $85.00$90.00
d) Weekday 9 Holes (Mon-Thurs) $36.00$38.00
e) Weekend/Holiday 9 Holes $46.00$48.00
f) Continuation Fee $35.00
g) Twilight Weekday (Mon-Thurs) $36.00$37.00
h) Twilight Weekend/Holiday $46.00$48.00
i) League Rate (Not Sat, Sun or Holiday) $26.00
j) Junior 18 Holes (Mon-Thurs) $28.00
k) Junior Twilight Weekend/Holiday $28.00
l) 36 Hole Special (Mon-Thurs) $95.00
m) 36 Hole Special (Fri-Sun) $110.00
n) Shotgun Tournament (Not To Exceed 18 Hole Green Fee) $120.00
o) Olympic Punch Ccard Pplus $30.00$32.00
p) Annual Pass Single $2,600.00$2,700.00
q) Annual Pass Couple $3,800.00$3,900.00
r) Annual Pass Family $4,400.00
s) Annual Pass Junior (Mon-Thurs) $700.00
1. Saturday, Sunday or Holiday (May-September Not to Exceed Rate)
May be used for twilight any day of the week including holidays.
2. Ages 62 & up with household income < $18,000.
16 | P a g e
TABLE G IVY GREEN CEMETERY
1. GRAVE SITES
a) Adult $1,552.00$1,600.00
b) Infant (Not in Infant Sections) $1,552.00$1,600.00
c) Infant Section $388.00$400.00
d) Veteran $902.00$930.00
e) Perpetual Care (collected at time of site sale) 10% of site fee
2. LINERS (Subject to sales tax)
a) Casket Liner $1,030.00$1,060.00
b) Cremation Liner $252.00$255.00
c) Infant Liner $420.00$430.00
d) Oversized Liner $1,380.00$1,400.00
3. OPENING AND CLOSING
a) Casket $905.00$930.00
b) Cremation $324.50$350.00
c) Infant $634.50$650.00
d) Veteran $543.00$560.00
4. DISINTERNMENT
a) Adult $1,940.00$2,000.00
b) Infant $1,940.00$2,000.00
c) Urn $311.00$330.00
d) Removal (only) $1,282.00$1,320.00
5. MARKER SETTING FEES
a) Setting Fee $400.00$410.00
6. GRAVE SIDE SERVICES
a) Chairs & Awning $450.00$460.00
7. MARKERS (Subject to sales tax)
a) Markers Value based on size and type of marker
2023 Rates & Fees 17 | P a g e
TABLE H KITSAP CONFERENCE CENTER
All Rates are Minimum Rates
1. ROOM RENTAL (in conjunction with food minimums) 1
a) Puget Sound Ballroom- per section (4 sections) $500.001200.00
b) Oyster Bay Room $250.00500.00
c) Marina Vista 1 & 2 – per section $200.00600.00
d) Marina Vista 3 $500.00800.00
e) Glacier Cove 1 & 2 – per section $200.00600.00
f) Fountain Room $850.002000.00
2. RECURRING ROOM RENTAL (at least 35 events per year)
a) Room fee waived with food purchase for at least 60 people.
1. 501(c)3 Organizations receive 50% off Room Rental rate with purchase of an Event Package.
18 | P a g e
TABLE I MUNICIPAL COURT
1. EX PARTE FILING FEE $20.00
2. HEARING EXAMINER APPEAL $73.00
3. TRAFFIC PENALTIES
a) Inattention to Driving $139.00
b) Automated Traffic Safety Camera Violations $139.00
4. INSURANCE DISMISSAL ADMINISTRATIVE FEE $25.00
5. CERTIFIED DOCUMENT FEE (per document) $5.00
6. COPY FEE (per page) $0.50
7. COPY FEE (made to CD or other electronic device) $20.00
8. COPY OF ELECTRONIC RECORDING OF COURT PROCEEDING (per CD) $10.00
9. APPEAL PREPARATION FEE $40.00
10. NON-SUFFICIENT FUNDS FEE (NSF Fee) $40.00
2023 Rates & Fees 19 | P a g e
TABLE J PARKING
1. PARKING FEES*
a) On-Street Locations
3 hours $20.00
10 hours $30.00
b) Off-Street Location
3 hours $20.00
10 hours $30.00
c) Parking Garage Monthly Permit $200.00/month
d) Administrative Immobilization Fee (i.e. boot) $100.00/boot
2. RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMITS*
a) Residential Parking Permits
First Two Permits NO COST
Each additional permit issued not-to-exceed four permits per unit $100.00
b) Petition for Creation of Residential Restricted Parking Zone $100.00
c) Replacement of parking permit $10.00/permit
d) Visitor Parking Permits NO COST
e) Service/Landlord Permits NO COST
3. PARKING PENALTIES
a) Overtime or Reparking
1st Violation in 180 Days $20.00
2nd Violation in 180 Days $60.00
3rd or More Violation in 180 Days $180.00
b) Non-Payment in Collection Devices
1st Violation in 180 days $20.00
2nd Violation in 180 days $60.00
3rd Violation in 180 days $180.00
c) Loading Zones $25.00
d) No Parking
1st Violation in 180 days $30.00
2nd Violation in 180 days $60.00
3rd Violation in 180 days $180.00
e) Wrong Way $35.00
f) Parked on Sidewalk $30.00
g) Fire Hydrant $35.00
h) 12" From Curb $30.00
i) Physically Disabled (Public and Private) $450.00
j) Counterfeiting or User of Counterfeit Permits,
Tokens or Script $500.00
Unauthorized Use of Permits $250.00
k) Blocked Driveway $35.00
l) Expired Tabs $45.00
m) 30 Foot to Stop Sign $30.00
20 | P a g e
n) Double Parked $35.00
o) No Stopping/No Standing $30.00
p) Failure to Respond – Additional Penalty $25.00
q) All parking infractions set forth in Chapter 10.10 BMC not identified above $30.00
*Rates are not-to-exceed rates. These rates shall apply unless reduced by the Department of Financial
Services for a specific site or use.
2023 Rates & Fees 21 | P a g e
TABLE K PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Non-Resident Fee – Base Fee plus 25%
All Rates Listed Are “Not To Exceed” Fees
9. FACILITY USE RENTAL RATES
Facility use policies apply.
Appropriate taxes are included in rates unless otherwise noted.
Regular Groups (10 or more meetings a year, reserved in advance) may receive up to a 20%
discount on Facility and Park Rental Fees.
a) SHERIDAN PARK COMMUNITY CENTER – ROOM RENTAL RATES
(Group A) NON-COMMERCIAL – Rental Rates
Recreation and/or educational purposes only.
Per hour, two (2) hour minimum
Daytime (Monday – Friday: 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM)
(i) Lounge $14.00
(ii) Room A, B/C, Conference Room $12.00
(iii) Gym $32.00$33.00
Evenings (Monday – Thursday: 5:00 PM to 10:00 PM)
(i) Lounge $30.00
(ii) Room A, B, Conference Room $24.00
(iii) Gym $43.00$44.00
(iv) Room Package (Lounge & Gym) $70.00$72.00
(v) Entire building – Up to eight (8) hours* $800.00$820.00
Friday Evening (5:00 PM to 10:00 PM) & Saturday and Sunday
(i) Lounge $36.00
(ii) Room A, B, Conference Room $28.00
(iii) Gym $50.00$52.00
(iv) Room Package (Lounge & Gym) $82.00$84.00
(v) Entire building – Up to eight (8) hours* $825.00$850.00
(Group B) COMMERCIAL – Rental Rates
Per hour, two (2) hour minimum
Lounge $54.00
Room A, B, Conference Room $42.00
Gym $75.00$78.00
Room Package (Lounge & Gym) $123.00$126.00
Entire Building - Up to eight (8) hours* $1,237.00$1,275.00
*Entire building rental for events with 250 or more participants requires additional staffing fee at
$19.00$20.00 per hour.
22 | P a g e
b) BREMERTON SR. CITIZENS CENTER - ROOM RENTAL RATES
(Group A) NON-COMMERCIAL – Rental Rates
Per hour, two (2) hour minimum
Cardroom/Meeting Room $25.00
Main Room $49.00
Kitchen $25.00
Additional staffing per hour $19.00
Entire Facility up to eight (8) hours $546.00
(Group B) COMMERCIAL – Rental Rates
Per hour, (two ) 2 hour minimum
Cardroom/Meeting Room $37.50
Main Room $73.50
Kitchen $37.50
Additional staffing per hour $19.00
Entire Facility – Up to eight (8) hours $819.00
c)b) PARK SHELTERS – RESERVATION FEES
Four (4) hour sessions per reservation unless otherwise noted.
Bremerton residents may reserve park shelters beginning January 1st for the upcoming year. Non-
resident reservations will be accepted beginning February 1st.
(Group A) NON-COMMERCIAL – Rental Rates
Bachmann, Bataan, Lent Landing, Matan, NAD (Upper) Shelters and Gazebos
$32.00$33.00
Blueberry Shelter $55.00$57.00
Evergreen Shelter 1 $87.00$90.00
Evergreen Shelter 2 or 3 $43.00$44.00
Evergreen Shelter 4 (not reservable, first come first served) NO CHARGE
Evergreen Shelter 5 or 6 $47.00$48.00
Evergreen Amphitheatre with power $200.00
Kiwanis Park Shelter $45.00$46.00
Lions Park Shelter 1 $60.00$62.00
Lions Park Shelter 2 $45.00$46.00
Manette Park Shelter $45.00$46.00
Warren Avenue Playfield Shelter $45.00$46.00
Reserve portion of a park not having a shelter. $32.00$33.00
(Group B) COMMERCIAL – Rental Rates
Bachmann, Bataan, Lent Landing, Matan, NAD (Upper) Shelters and Gazebos
$48.00$49.50
Blueberry Shelter $82.50$85.50
Evergreen Shelter 1 $130.50$135.00
Evergreen Shelter 2 or 3 $64.50$66.00
Evergreen Shelter 4 (not reservable) NO CHARGE
Evergreen Shelter 5 or 6 $70.50$72.50
Evergreen Amphitheatre with power $300.00
2023 Rates & Fees 23 | P a g e
Kiwanis Park Shelter $67.50$70.00
Lions Park Shelter 1 $90.00$93.00
Lions Park Shelter 2 $67.50$69.50
Manette Park Shelter $67.50$69.50
Warren Avenue Playfield Shelter $67.50$69.50
Reserve portion of a park not having a shelter. $48.00$49.50
d)c) SPECIAL EVENTS, CELEBRATIONS, WEDDINGS
(Group A) NON-COMMERCIAL – Rental Rates
Harborside Fountain Park (Waterfront plaza only, per four (4) hour session $45.00$50.00
Louis Mentor Boardwalk $545.00$560.00
Stage (20’ x 24’) –Available Memorial Day-Labor Day (per day) $250.00
(Group B) COMMERCIAL – Rental Rates
Harborside Fountain Park (Waterfront plaza only, per four (4) hour session $67.50$75.00
Louis Mentor Boardwalk $817.50$840.00
Stage (20’x24’) – Available Memorial Day-Labor Day (per day) $367.50$375.00
e)d) ATHLETIC FIELD – RESERVATIONS
Per hour unless noted
(Group A) NON-COMMERCIAL
Youth Use $18.50$19.00
Adult Use $34.00$35.00
(Group B) COMMERCIAL $61.00$62.00
Game Fees
(i) Baseball/Softball $42.00$43.00
(ii) Soccer $64.00$66.00
(iii) Sand Volleyball $31.50
e) OUTDOOR COURT – RESERVATION
Per hour unless noted
- (Group A) NON-COMMERCIAL – Rental
Basketball Court (Per Half Court) $5.00
Pickleball Court $5.00
Tennis Court $10.00
- (Group B) COMMERCIAL – Rental
Basketball Court (Per Half Court) $7.50
Pickleball Court $7.50
Tennis Court $20.00
f) LIONS TENNIS COURT LIGHTS
1 token (1 hour) $3.00
6 tokens (6 hours) $14.50
24 | P a g e
f)g) BLUEBERRY PARK – P-PATCH ANNUAL RATE
Non-commercial gardening only.
Raised Beds $15.00
10’ x 20’ Beds $55.00
16’ x 30’ Beds $80.00
g) LIONS TENNIS COURT LIGHTS
1 token (1 hour) $3.00
6 tokens (6 hours) $14.50
2. PROGRAM FEES & CHARGES
a) NEW PROGRAMS See Section 3, subsection (a)
b) ATHLETIC PROGRAM FEES
VOLLEYBALL
League Play (per team, per game) $31.00$32.00
Open Gym (Oct. – June) per person $5.00
Sand Volleyball $31.00$32.00
BASKETBALL
Men’s League Play (per team, per game) $67.00$74.00
Boy’s League Play (per team, per game) $42.00$44.00
Boy’s League (Individual Registration - per individual) $52.00$54.00
- PICKLEBALL (Indoor Program)
Drop In $4.00
10-Visit Punchcard $32.00
SOFTBALL
Adult League Play (per team, per game) $50.40$51.40
Adult League – Players fee (per player, per game) $2.20$2.27
TOURNAMENTS (BASEBALL/SOFTBALL AND SOCCER)
INVITATIONAL TOURNAMENTS
c) Lions – One Day $463.00$486.00
d) Lions – Two Day $739.00$776.00
e) Lions – Three Day $983.00$1,032.00
f) Pendergast – One Day $609.00$640.00
g) Pendergast – Two Day $952.00$1,000.00
h) Pendergast – Three Day $1,155.00$1,213.00
2023 Rates & Fees 25 | P a g e
STATE TOURNAMENTS*
i) Lions – One Day $645.00$677.00
j) Lions – Two Day $962.00$1,010.00
k) Lions – Three Day $1,119.00$1,175.00
l) Pendergast – One Day $838.00$880.00
m) Pendergast – Two Day $1,119.00$1,175.00
n) Pendergast – Three Day $1,327.00$1,393.00
*Regional and National Tournaments cost to be negotiated depending on field preparation requirements.
3. SENIOR CITIZEN CENTER AND RECREATION DIVISION PROGRAMS
a) PROGRAM FEE FORMULAS. Except for the Sr. Citizens Trip program, participant fees for activities
(programs, classes, events, etc.) promoted by the Sr. Citizen Center and the Recreation Division are
established by the following formulas:
Activities when the instructor is on City payroll.
*Based on “Not-to-Exceed” rates
[(Total class hours including preparation) x (Instructor’s hourly wage) x (1.5 Administration
factor)] divided by (minimum # of students per activity)] + (the cost of group supplies divided by
minimum # of students) + Cost of individual class supplies, if applicable = Student class fee for
City of Bremerton Resident
Activities taught by contracted instruction.
*Based on “Not-to-Exceed” rates
[(Price per student required by the Instructor less class supply fees) x (1.5 Administration
factor)] + Class supply fees = Student class fee for City of Bremerton Resident.
Non-Resident Fees for Recreational Programs.
For recreation classes, programs, and rentals – ranging from:
$5.00 to $25.00 add on 25%
$25.01 to $50.00 add a flat $6.25
$50.01 to $100.00 add a flat $12.50
$100.01 to $200.00 add a flat $25.00
$200.01 to $400.00add a flat $50.00
$400.01 to $750.00 add a flat $100.00
$750.01 to $1,000.00 add a flat $150.00
$1,000.00 + add a flat $200.00
b) SENIOR CENTER ACTIVITIES (AGE 55+)
Couples Membership is for two people, at least one needs to be 55 or better, who reside at the
same address.
Associate Memberships are for those individuals not yet 55 but still would like to participate in the
programs, trips and classes offered at the Center.
26 | P a g e
Senior Citizen – City Resident annual membership $20.00
Senior Citizen – Non-Resident annual membership $35.00
Senior Center – City Resident Couples annual membership $32.00
Senior Center – Non-Resident Couples annual membership $52.00
Senior Center – City Resident Associate annual membership $32.00
Senior Center – Non-Resident Associate annual membership $52.00
Senior Center – Daily Drop-In Fee (Non-Class Activities, per person, per day)$4.00
c) SENIOR CENTER TRIPS Cost plus 25%
2023 Rates & Fees 27 | P a g e
TABLE L POLICE DEPARTMENT
1. TRAFFIC ACCIDENT REPORTS $10.00
2. FINGERPRINTS – 1st Card $10.00
a) Each Additional Card $10.00
3. CRIMINAL HISTORY CHECK $10.00
4. ALARM COMPLIANCE FEE
a) 1st False Alarm in any 1 Quarter $60.00
b) 2nd False Alarm in the same Quarter $80.00
c) 3rd False Alarm in the same Quarter or Subsequent Alarms in a Calendar Quarter
$160.00
5. SERVICE FEE FOR ANTI-HARASSMENT ORDER $50.00
6. SERVICE OF ARREST WARRANTS AND SUBPOENAS
a) Arrest Warrant $15.00 plus mileage
b) Subpoena $6.00 plus mileage
c) Preparation of return of service $5.00
Mileage (for each mile actually and necessarily traveled by a member of the Police Department in going to or returning from any
place of service, or attempted service) current business mileage rate allowed by the Internal Revenue Service.
7. TAXICABS
a) Taxicab Business Certificate $30.00/year
b) Taxicab Driver’s Certificate $30.00/year
c) Vehicle Decal $10.00/vehicle/year
d) Annual Renewal $30.00
e) Certificate Changes $10.00
f) Finger prints $10.00
g) WSP Background Check (effective 1/1/2019) $51.25
WSP Background Check (effective 7/1/2019) $71.25
8. CONCEALED WEAPONS PERMITS (Rates set by State subject to change)
a) New Permit (effective 1/1/2019) $49.25
b) Renewal Permit $32.00
c) Late Permit $42.00
d) Replacement $10.00
e) Firearm Dealer License $125.00
9. BODY WORN CAMERA RECORDINGS* per RCW 42.56.240(14) $60.00 per hour of video
*Research and Redaction Processing – Processing requires full playback of each video by the
processing technician before redaction begins to verify the involvement of each party in the footage
and ensure the footage is redacted in accordance with Washington state law. Please keep this in mind
when requesting footage from multiple BWCs or for footage for long timeframes.
28 | P a g e
TABLE M PUBLIC RECORD FEES
1. Copy or Print - Maximum size is 11x17 (No fee for first 50 pages) $0.15/page
2. Scan – Maximum size is 11x17 (No fee for first 50 pages) $0.10/page
3. Electronic Files or Attachments uploaded to email, cloud-based data storage service or other means of
electronic delivery $0.05/4 files
4. Transmission of Public Records in an Electronic Format $0.10/GB
5. Customized service charge for requests requiring the use of information technology expertise per RCW
42.56.120(3) Actual Costs
6. CD/DVD $2.00
7. Digital Storage Media or Device Actual Cost
8. Postage or Delivery Charges Actual Costs
9. Certified copies of public records. The maximum size for photocopies is 11x17 $5.00 per document
10. Oversized Plans, Aerial Photos, Drawings, and Maps (Black and White) $8.00/page or
Actual Costs when performed by a Vendor
11. Color GIS Plotted Maps $5.00/sq. ft.
12. Other Documents:
a) Medical Records $19.00
b) Fire Incident/Investigation Reports $8.00
c) Budget
(Hard Copy) $70.00
(Electronic Version) $10.00
d) Annual Report
(Hard Copy) $35.00
(Electronic Version) $10.00
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 upon request.
2023 Rates & Fees 29 | P a g e
TABLE N PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1. RIGHT-OF WAY USE PERMITS FEES
a) Type A (Short Term Use) Regular (Misc. Construction) $345.00
Dumpster – Individual personal use NO CHARGE
Dumpster – Commercial/Construction $345.00
b) Type B (Disturbance of ROW)
Sidewalk Repairs (2 inspections) NO CHARGE
Driveway, Transverse Street Patch and Spot Patches (2 inspections) $345.00
Frontage Improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk, illumination, etc.); Longitudinal Street Patch;
and Utility Installation $4.32/ft with a $260.00 minimum
New Street $7.34/ft with a $880.00 minimum
Water & Sewer Mains & Laterals (ROW Permit) (2 inspections) $345.00
Additional Inspection $86.00/hour + equipment charges
c) Type C (Long Term Use)
Application and Processing $345.00
Annual Renewal $86.00$80.00
d) Type D Regular (Franchised Utility Routine Maintenance) $173.00
e) Plan Reviews $0.27/foot of improvement with $173.00 minimum
2. ADDITIONAL WORK $86.00/hour + Equipment Charges
3. RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION $1,900.00
4. BMC 10.24 HOUSEMOVING/OVERSIZE LOADS $690.00+$75.00/mile to .10 of a mile
5. BANNER FEE INSTALL/REMOVAL $212.00
6. SIGN CREATION $COST
7. TRAFFIC CONTROL $86.00/hour + Equipment Charges
8. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
a) Barricades if not returned $30.00/barricade
b) Barricades $20.00 per barricade per day
c) Cones, if not returned or damaged $16.00/cone
d) Cones $2.00 per cone per day
e) Signs, if not returned or damaged $215.00/sign
f) Signs $18.00 per sign per day
g) Labor Rate Hourly (equipment not included) $86.00
9. BLOCK PARTY STREET CLOSURE $25.00
30 | P a g e
TABLE O TAX & LICENSE
1. REGULATORY LICENSE FEES
a) BMC 5.17 Charitable Solicitation
Non-Profit $25.00/60 days
Professional Fundraiser $675.00/60 days
b) BMC 5.22 Dance/Public $265.00/yr or $70.00/30 days
c) BMC 5.96 Erotic Dance Studios $700.00/yr
d) Dancers $100.00/yr
e) BMC 5.16 Mobile Food Vendor $150.00/veh/yr
f) BMC 5.16 Peddlers $75.00/yr or $25.00/30 days
g) BMC 5.36 Special Events $100.00/event
h) BMC 5.08 Street/Sidewalk Vendors $100/yr
i) Site Relocation $50.00
j) BMC 5.16 Temporary Merchant $400.00/30 days
2. BUSINESS LICENSE FEE
a) BMC 5.02 $75.00/yr
2023 Rates & Fees 31 | P a g e
TABLE P TELECOMMUNICATIONS
1. TOWER LEASE - APPLICATION, RENEWAL AND ASSIGNMENT FEE $530.00
2. CABLE FRANCHISE APPLICATION AND RENEWAL FEE DEPOSIT1 $3,588.00
1Actual cost will be based on staff time. City may require additional deposit(s) up to $3,500 per deposit if funds
are exhausted.
3. MASTER PERMIT - APPLICATION AND RENEWAL FEE DEPOSITS2 $5,125.00
2Actual cost will be based on staff time plus legal review. City may require additional deposit(s) up to $5,000
per deposit if funds are exhausted.
4. TELECOM LICENSE FEE $222.00/one time
32 | P a g e
TABLE Q TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT
1. VEHICLE TAB FEE $20.00
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Ordinance to amend and re-establish Utility
Assessments, Rates, and Fees, and
Charges for 2024
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: Financial Services and
PW&U
Presenter: Mike Riley/Tom
Knuckey
Phone: (360) 473-5303
SUMMARY: Ordinance to amend and re-establish the 2024 Utility Assessments, Rates, Fees, and
Charges.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance No. ______; and 2) Exhibit A
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Misc. Fees and Charges were adjusted by change
in the Construction Cost Index for all urban consumers, Seattle for the month ending August 31,
2023 at 5.4%. The Utility rates are incorporated in the 2024 Proposed Budget.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☐ Limited Presentation ☒ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to pass Ordinance No. ____ amending and re-establishing 2024 Assessments, Rates, Fees,
and Charges for Water, Wastewater, Stormwater, and other related services.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 01/02/2018
A10
1
2024 Utilities Rates and Fees
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, amending and reestablishing the
assessments, rates, fees and charges established in Ordinance No.
5461 regarding rates and fees relating to the Department of Public
Works and Utilities for water, wastewater, stormwater and other
related services.
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend and reestablish the assessments,
rates, fees, and charges (“Rates and Fees”) relating to the Department of Public Works and
Utilities for general facility charges and water, wastewater, stormwater, and other related
services established in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 5461; NOW THEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Rate Tables established. Rates and fees for services relating to the
Department of Public Works and Utilities for general facilities charges and water, wastewater,
stormwater, and other related services, as established in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 5461, are
hereby amended and reestablished in their entirety as set forth in the attached Exhibit A of this
ordinance, said exhibit is incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. Rate Tables – Effective Date. The amendment and
reestablishment of rate tables as set forth in Section 1 above shall be effective January 1, 2024.
SECTION 3. Corrections. The City Clerk and codifiers of this ordinance
are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the
correction of scrivener, clerical, typographical, and spelling errors, references, ordinance
numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto.
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 November, 2023.
_________________________________
JEFF COUGHLIN, Council President
2
2024 Utilities Rates and Fees
Approved this ________ day of November, 2023.
_________________________________
GREG WHEELER, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________ _________________________________
ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk KYLIE FINNELL, City Attorney
PUBLISHED the ________ day of ______________________, 2023.
EFFECTIVE the ________ day of ______________________, 2023.
ORDINANCE NO. ________.
2023
GENERAL FACILITY CHARGES
Water based on meter size average normal flow
5/8" x 3/4" 6,680.00$
1" 6,680.00$
1" Commercial 9,153.00$
1 1/2" Commercial 53,443.00$
2" Commercial 53,443.00$
3" Commercial 133,609.00$
4" Commercial 267,217.00$
Greater than 4"
5/8" x 3/4" 7,797.00$
1" 7,797.00$
1" Commercial 9,669.00$
1 1/2" Commercial 54,581.00$
2" Commercial 54,581.00$
3" Commercial 140,351.00$
4" Commercial 280,699.00$
Greater than 4"
Stormwater (per IHSU)1,604.00$
CONNECTION FEES
Water Connection Fees*Inside Outside
5/8" x 3/4"4,245.00$ 4,401.00$ 6,368.00$ 6,602.00$
1"4,483.00$ 4,571.00$ 6,725.00$ 6,857.00$
1 1/2"10,067.00$ 9,995.00$ 15,101.00$ 14,993.00$
2"10,434.00$ 10,421.00$ 15,651.00$ 15,632.00$
3" 27,029.00$ 27,645.00$ 40,544.00$ 41,468.00$
4" 29,201.00$ 29,764.00$ 43,802.00$ 44,646.00$
6" 35,741.00$ 37,462.00$ 53,612.00$ 56,193.00$
8" 41,841.00$ 43,834.00$ 62,762.00$ 65,751.00$
10" 49,497.00$ 51,514.00$ 74,246.00$ 77,271.00$
12" and greater
Wet Tapping (Water Main Only, excluding excavation & backfill)*
4" 4,290.00$ 4,526.00$ 6,435.00$ 6,789.00$
6" 4,572.00$ 4,923.00$ 6,858.00$ 7,385.00$
8" 5,543.00$ 6,024.00$ 8,315.00$ 9,036.00$
10"8,104.00$ 8,869.00$ 12,156.00$ 13,304.00$
12"9,182.00$ 10,524.00$ 13,773.00$ 15,786.00$
** Greater than 12"
138,860.00$
Exhibit A
ASSESSMENTS, RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2024
2024
Inside Outside City Limits
6,943.00$
6,943.00$
9,513.00$
55,543.00$
55,543.00$
1,667.00$
277,719.00$
Case by Case basis
Wastewater based on meter size average normal flow
8,103.00$
8,103.00$
10,049.00$
56,726.00$
56,726.00$
145,867.00$
291,730.00$
Case by Case basis
Actual time & material + equipment
Actual time & material + equipment
1 of 8
2023
Exhibit A
ASSESSMENTS, RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2024
2024
Wet Tapping (Water Main to Property Line)*Inside Outside
2" - fire service 5,985.00$ 5,950.00$ 8,978.00$ 8,925.00$
4"13,712.00$ 15,119.00$ 20,568.00$ 22,679.00$
6"13,513.00$ 14,998.00$ 20,270.00$ 22,497.00$
8"15,320.00$ 15,994.00$ 22,980.00$ 23,991.00$
10" 18,514.00$ 20,530.00$ 27,771.00$ 30,795.00$
12"20,212.00$ 22,257.00$ 30,318.00$ 33,386.00$
** Greater than 12"
Fire Hydrant Installation*
6" x 8" and smaller - service to property line 17,118.00$ 18,049.00$ 25,677.00$ 27,074.00$
6"x 10" - service to property line 17,267.00$ 18,204.00$ 25,901.00$ 27,306.00$
6"x 12" service to property line 17,431.00$ 18,375.00$ 26,147.00$ 27,563.00$
PLAN CHECK/INSPECTION FEES
Engineering Services**Inside Outside
Plan Check Fees
Main Extensions: per foot 0.62$ 0.65$ 0.93$ 0.98$
BUT not less than 414.00$ 460.00$ 621.00$ 690.00$
(Includes hydrants and appurtenances
and connection to water system)
Pump Stations 3,456.00$ 3,640.00$ 5,184.00$ 5,460.00$
Fireline Extension 173.00$ 190.00$ 260.00$ 285.00$
Irrigation Systems 173.00$ 180.00$ 260.00$ 270.00$
Miscellaneous (per hour) plus equipment 86.00$ 90.00$ 129.00$ 135.00$
Storm Drainage Plan Review Fees ***
Preliminary Drainage Plans
Residential Development 690.00$ 730.00$ N/A N/A
Non-Residential Development 430.00$ 730.00$ N/A N/A
Plus per IHSU 22.00$ 22.77$
Final Detailed Drainage Plans
Residential Development (per lot)
0 - 20 Lots 73.00$ 80.00$ N/A N/A
21 - 50 Lots 65.00$ 70.00$ N/A N/A
51 - 100 Lots 52.00$ 60.00$ N/A N/A
100+ Lots 43.00$ 50.00$ N/A N/A
Minimum Charge 518.00$ 550.00$ N/A N/A
Non-Residential Development
per IHSU 43.00$ 50.00$ N/A N/A
Minimum Charge 518.00$ 550.00$ N/A N/A
Resubmittal Fees
First Resubmittal No Charge No Charge N/A N/A
Subsequent Resubmittal 518.00$ 550.00$ N/A N/A
Actual time & material + equipment
2 of 8
2023
Exhibit A
ASSESSMENTS, RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2024
2024
Field Inspection Fees Inside Outside
Water main extensions (per foot)1.73$ 1.73$ 2.60$ 2.60$
but not less than:605.00$ 605.00$ 908.00$ 908.00$
Pump Station 3,456.00$ 3,456.00$ 5,184.00$ 5,184.00$
Miscellaneous (per hour)86.00$ 86.00$ 129.00$ 129.00$
Wastewater Fees **
Lateral Connection at P/L 173.00$ 173.00$ 260.00$ 260.00$
Lateral Connection at Main 432.00$ 432.00$ 648.00$ 648.00$
Conveyance Facility Ext. (Per Foot)3.45$ 3.45$ 5.00$ 5.00$
but not less than:864.00$ 864.00$ 1,296.00$ 1,296.00$
Pump Station 3,456.00$ 3,456.00$ 5,184.00$ 5,184.00$
Miscellaneous (per hour)86.00$ 86.00$ 129.00$ 129.00$
Storm Drainage Inspection Fees ***
Residential Development (per lot)86.00$ 86.00$ N/A N/A
Non-Residential Development (per IHSU)43.00$ 43.00$ N/A N/A
Minimum Charge 346.00$ 346.00$ N/A N/A
Conveyance Facility Extensions (per foot)2.15$ 2.15$ N/A N/A
Minimum Charge 518.00$ 518.00$ N/A N/A
Unscheduled Inspections**** (per site visit)86.00$ 86.00$ N/A N/A
MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES
Office Services Inside Outside
New Account 24.00$ 25.00$ N/A N/A
Account Maintenance 5.00$ 5.00$ N/A N/A
Past Due Notice 3.50$ 3.50$ N/A N/A
Lien Recovery Charge 147.00$ 147.00$ N/A N/A
Utility/Lien Search Fee (Manual) per parcel 37.00$ 38.00$ N/A N/A
Park Reservation Fee (non-refundable)210.00$ 210.00$ N/A N/A
Field Services
Pavement Restoration Charge
(refundable, if assessed and not required)
Asphalt Patch 2,359.00$ 2,359.00$ 3,539.00$ 3,539.00$
Concrete Patch 1,681.00$ 1,681.00$ 2,522.00$ 2,522.00$
Asphalt Trench 4,321.00$ 4,321.00$ 6,482.00$ 6,482.00$
Concrete Trench 5,179.00$ 5,179.00$ 7,769.00$ 7,769.00$
3 of 8
2023
Exhibit A
ASSESSMENTS, RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2024
2024
Field Services (continued)Inside Outside
County Road Permit N/A N/A N/A Cost Cost
Water Meter Installation
3/4" & 1"184.00$ 184.00$ 276.00$ 184.00$
1-1/2" & 2"290.00$ 290.00$ 435.00$ 290.00$
3" and greater
Water Meter Reactivation 69.00$ 69.00$ 104.00$ 69.00$
Water Meter Reinstallation 184.00$ 184.00$ 276.00$ 184.00$
Water Meter Deactivation 69.00$ 69.00$ 104.00$ 69.00$
Water Meter Tampering
Tampering Fee 501.00$ 501.00$ 752.00$ 501.00$
Tampering Repair
Fire Service - Detector, Meter & MXU 793.00$ 813.00$ 1,190.00$ 1,220.00$
Storz Adapter 420.00$ 462.00$ 630.00$ 693.00$
Water Service Turn-off/Turn-on
(Customer Request)
Regular Hours 69.00$ 69.00$ 104.00$ 69.00$
After Hours 267.00$ 290.00$ 190.00$ 290.00$
Delinquency Notice 26.00$ 26.00$ N/A N/A
Water Service Turn-off/Turn-on
(Delinquent Accounts)
Regular Hours 69.00$ 69.00$ N/A N/A
After Hours 267.00$ 290.00$ 190.00$ 290.00$
Flow and Pressure Test (Uncertified)
3/4" & 1" meters only 132.00$ 132.00$ 198.00$ 132.00$
1-1/2" & 2" meters only 237.00$ 237.00$ 356.00$ 237.00$
Larger than 2"
Meter Test Fee (based on meter size)
3/4" & 1"289.00$ 289.00$ 434.00$ 289.00$
1-1/2" & 2"374.00$ 374.00$ 561.00$ 374.00$
3" or greater
Utility Plant Locates
Regular Hours N/C N/C N/C N/C
After Hours 267.00$ 267.00$ 401.00$ 267.00$
Emergency N/C N/C N/C N/C
Utility Compliance Specialist
Inspection 118.00$ 118.00$ 177.00$ 118.00$
Administration Fee 50.00$ 50.00$ 75.00$ 50.00$
Actual Time, Materials & Equipment
Actual Time, Materials & Equipment
Actual Time, Materials & Equipment
Actual Time, Materials & Equipment
4 o f 8
2023
Exhibit A
ASSESSMENTS, RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2024
2024
RETAIL WATER SERVICE RATES
General Service - Monthly Service Charge Inside Outside
Meter Size
5/8 x 3/4 inches 15.28$ 15.81 22.91$ 23.71$
1 inch 17.46$ 18.07 26.21$ 27.13$
1 1/2 inch 24.83$ 25.70 37.25$ 38.55$
2 inch 33.36$ 34.53 50.02$ 51.77$
3 inch 63.29$ 65.51 94.91$ 98.23$
4 inch 117.59$ 121.71 176.38$ 182.55$
6 inch 418.09$ 432.72 627.14$ 649.09$
8 inch 1,527.20$ 1,580.65 2,290.82$ 2,371.00$
10 inch 5,446.89$ 5,637.53 8,170.31$ 8,456.27$
12 inch 20,476.59$ 21,193.27 30,714.87$ 31,789.89$
Residential Commodity Charge (per HCF)
Per HCF/Month 2.64$ 2.73 3.95$ 4.09
Non - Residential Commodity Charge (per HCF)2.39$ 2.47 3.57$ 3.69
Fire Protection - Monthly Service Charge
Service Size
1 inch 31.71$ 32.82 47.54$ 49.20
1 1/2 inch 47.71$ 49.38 71.57$ 74.07
2 inch 62.03$ 64.20 93.04$ 96.30
3 inch 68.34$ 70.73 102.54$ 106.13
4 inch 74.50$ 77.11 111.75$ 115.66
6 inch 92.99$ 96.24 139.48$ 144.36
8 inch 123.80$ 128.13 185.70$ 192.20
10 inch 173.24$ 179.30 259.88$ 268.98
12 inch 247.50$ 256.16 371.25$ 384.24
Commodity Charge (per HCF)4.77$ 4.94 7.16$ 7.41
- For Usage Other Than Firefighting
Low-Income (1) Senior and Low-Income(1) Disabled Citizen - Monthly Service Charge
General Service - meter size 5/8" x 3/4" 9.17$ 9.49 13.75$ 14.23
General Service - meter size 1"10.48$ 10.84 15.73$ 16.28
Residential Commodity Charge (per HCF)
Per HCF/Month 1.58$ 1.64 2.37$ 2.45
Temporary/Construction Meter
1" Meter
Deposit 600.00$ 600.00 900.00$ 600.00$
Base Fee (per month)17.46$ 18.07 26.20$ 27.12$
Set Up Fee & Removal Fee 396.00$ 396.00$ 594.00$ 396.00$
5 of 8
2023
Exhibit A
ASSESSMENTS, RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2024
2024
RETAIL WATER SERVICE RATES (CONTINUED)Inside Outside
Temporary/Construction Meter (continued)
Hydrant meter (3" Meter)
Deposit 4,000.00$ 4,000.00 6,000.00$ 4,000.00$
Base Fee (per month)63.29$ 65.51 94.94$ 98.27$
Set Up Fee 396.00$ 396.00$ 594.00$ 396.00$
Equipment Loss/Damage
Commodity Charge (per HCF)2.39$ 2.47 3.57$ 3.69
City Parks and Recreation Dept. - Irrigation
Commodity Charge (per HCF)1.19$ 1.23
Gold Mountain Golf Course Complex - Irrigation
Commodity Charge (per HCF)1.62$ 1.68
RETAIL WASTEWATER SERVICE RATES
Monthly Service Charge Inside Outside
Single Family
Base Charge (per account)38.63$ 39.98 57.94$ 59.97
Commodity Charge (per HCF)5.19$ 5.37 7.77$ 8.04
Duplex on 1 Meter or 2 Bldgs. on 1 Meter
Base Charge (per unit)30.59$ 31.66 45.89$ 47.50
Commodity Charge (per HCF)5.19$ 5.37 7.77$ 8.04
Multi - Family
Base Charge (per unit)30.59$ 31.66 45.89$ 47.50
Commodity Charge (per HCF)5.19$ 5.37 7.77$ 8.04
Low-Income (1) Senior and Low-Income(1) Disabled Citizen
Base Charge (per account)23.18$ 23.99 34.76$ 35.98
Commodity Charge (per HCF)3.11$ 3.22 4.66$ 4.82
Commercial I
Base Charge (per account)57.10$ 59.10 85.66$ 88.66
Commodity Charge (per HCF)5.34$ 5.53 8.00$ 8.28
Commercial II
Base Charge (per account)57.52$ 59.53 86.28$ 89.30
Commodity Charge (per HCF)6.84$ 7.08 10.26$ 10.62
Commercial III
Base Charge (per account)58.09$ 60.12 87.15$ 90.20
Commodity Charge (per HCF)8.35$ 8.64 12.52$ 12.96
Actual Time, Materials & Equipment
6 of 8
2023
Exhibit A
ASSESSMENTS, RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2024
2024
RETAIL WASTEWATER SERVICE RATES (CONTINUED)
Monthly Service Charge Inside Outside
Commercial IV
Base Charge (per account)58.66$ 60.71 87.99$ 91.07
Commodity Charge (per HCF)9.87$ 10.22 14.79$ 15.31
Commercial V
Base Charge (per account)64.52$ 66.78 96.81$ 100.20
Commodity Charge (per HCF)12.34$ 12.77 18.50$ 19.15
Commercial VI
Base Charge (per account)70.97$ 73.45 106.47$ 110.20
Commodity Charge (per HCF)15.41$ 15.95 23.12$ 23.93
Commercial VII
Base Charge (per account)78.07$ 80.80 117.11$ 121.21
Commodity Charge (per HCF)18.00$ 18.63 27.01$ 27.96
Commercial Special
Base Charge (per account)85.87$ 88.88 128.82$ 133.33
Commodity Charge (per HCF)24.09$ 24.93 36.09$ 37.35
Beverage Production
Base Charge (per account)58.09$ 60.12 87.15$ 90.20
Commodity Charge (per HCF)5.43$ 5.62 8.13$ 8.41
Commercial Fountains - Separately Metered
Base Charge (per account)57.10$ 59.10 85.66$ 88.66
Commodity Charge (per HCF)1.76$ 1.82 2.64$ 2.73
Septage Disposal (per gallon of tank capacity)0.29$ 0.30 0.43$ 0.45
Leachate Per Gallon of Tank Capacity
Individual Residential Grinder Pumps
Grinder Pump Surcharge 12.45$ 12.89 18.68$ 19.33
Low-Income (1) Senior and Low-Income(1) Disabled Citizen
Grinder Pump Surcharge 7.47$ 7.73 11.21$ 11.60
RETAIL STORMWATER RATES
Monthly Service Charge Inside Outside
Residential I (Single Family/Duplex)
Base Charge (per account)21.50$ 23.33 N/A N/A
Exception: Duplex
with 2 Meters (per account)10.75$ 11.67 N/A N/A
7 of 8
2023
Exhibit A
ASSESSMENTS, RATES, FEES, AND CHARGES
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2024
2024
RETAIL STORMWATER RATES (CONTINUED)
Monthly Service Charge Inside Outside
Residential II - SW Impact Fee (per IHSU)
50% of the Res I Base Charge 10.76$ 11.67 N/A N/A
Residential III - SW Impact Fee (per IHSU)
100% of the Res I Base Charge 21.50$ 23.33 N/A N/A
Commercial I
Base Charge (per IHSU)21.50$ 23.33 N/A N/A
Commercial II - SW Impact Fee (per IHSU)
50% of the Comm I Base Charge 10.76$ 11.67 N/A N/A
Commercial III - SW Impact Fee (per IHSU)
100% of the Comm I Base Charge 21.50$ 23.33 N/A N/A
Public School Districts (per account)21.50$ 23.33 N/A N/A
Low-Income (1) Senior and Low-Income(1) Disabled Citizen
Base Charge (per account)12.90$ 14.00 N/A N/A
Multi - Family & Commercial Rate Adjustment
Water Quality (per IHSU)2.37$ 2.57 N/A N/A
Water Quantity (per IHSU)7.19$ 7.80 N/A N/A
Stormwater Penalty
New Multi - Family & Commercial
development without on-site detention
Charge (per IHSU)4.76$ 5.16 N/A N/A
(1) Low-Income defined as Gross Earned Income of $40,000 or less. Low-Income is a 40% discount.
*Pavement Restoration Charge May Also Be Assessed
** Fees include original review and one resubmittal review.
Additional reviews will be charged at miscellaneous hourly rate (above).
*** Does not apply to single family residence or duplex construction on an existing established lot.
**** (Unscheduled inspections shall be tracked through the course of a project and billed
after the final site inspection. Fees for unscheduled inspections shall be paid prior to final
8 of 8
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Ordinance to levy Property
Taxes for Collection in 2024
Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
COUNCIL MEETING Date: November 1, 2023
Department: Financial Services
Presenter: Mike Riley
Phone: (360) 473-5303
SUMMARY: Cities over 10,000 in population are allowed to raise their annual property tax collection
by either 1% or the amount of the July Implicit Price Deflator (IPD), whichever is lower. This year,
the IPD was 3.67%.
The City is requesting the full 1% increase to our general property tax and EMS levy over the prior
year’s collection, as allowed by law. This increase, along with the amounts anticipated for new
construction, has been included in the 2024 Proposed Budget.
RCW 84.52.020 requires all taxing districts to “certify to the county legislative authority, for the
purpose of levying district taxes…the amounts to be raised” by property taxes. RCW 84.55.120
requires that the certification includes the enabling tax ordinance setting the property tax rate. These
documents must be submitted to the county by November 30, 2023.
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. _____ establishing the amount to be collected in 2024 by taxation
on the assessed valuation of taxable property within the City limits of Bremerton and setting the
property levy rate.
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The proposed 2024 budget anticipates passage
of this ordinance. Budgeted revenue matches the levy amounts as the total collections in recent
years closely approximate the actual amount collected. In the General Fund revenue from the
general property tax levy is $8,981,223 and the EMS levy is $2,299,698. Revenue from voter
approved levies are budgeted in Debt Service funds and include $900,000 for the 2010 Public Safety
bond and $550,000 for the 2015 Public Safety bond.
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ Limited Presentation ☐ Full Presentation
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to pass Ordinance No. _____ establishing the amount to be collected in 2024 by taxation on
the assessed valuation of taxable property within the City limits of Bremerton and setting the property
levy rate.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 01/02/2018
A11
1
2024 Property Tax
ORDINANCE NO. _____
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, establishing the amount to be collected in
2024 by taxation on the assessed valuation of taxable property
within the City limits of Bremerton and setting the property levy
rate.
WHEREAS, the City Council attests that the population of the City of Bremerton
for 2023 is 44,640; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has properly given notice of the public hearing held
on November 1, 2023, to consider the City’s revenue sources for the City’s General Fund
budget; and
WHEREAS, the City’s actual levy amount from the previous year, including any
refunds and abatements levied was $8,855,902; and
WHEREAS, the City’s actual EMS levy amount from the previous year,
including any refunds and abatements levied was $2,267,399; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, after hearing and duly considering all relevant
evidence and testimony presented, has determined that the City of Bremerton requires a regular
levy and EMS levy in the maximum amounts allowable, which is a 1.0% increase to the highest
lawful levy allowed by law.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON,
WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That an increase in the regular property tax levy is hereby
authorized for the levy to be collected in the 2024 tax year. The dollar amount of the increase
over the actual levy from the previous year shall be $31,927 which is an effective percent
increase of 0.36415% from the previous year levy. This increase is exclusive of additional
revenue resulting from new construction, any increase in the value of state assessed property,
and any additional amounts resulting from any annexations that have occurred and refunds
made.
SECTION 2. That an EMS levy is hereby authorized for the levy to be
collected in the 2024 tax year. The dollar amount of the increase over the actual levy from the
previous year shall be $8,402 which is an effective percent increase of 0.3743% from the
highest allowable levy. This increase is exclusive of additional revenue resulting from new
construction, any increase in the value of state assessed property, and any additional amounts
resulting from any annexations that have occurred and refunds made. This levy is further
subject to the maximum allowable levy rate of $0.37 per $1,000 of assessed valuation.
2
2024 Property Tax
SECTION 3. That a property tax levy for debt redemption of the 2010
Public Safety UTGO Refunding Bonds, as previously authorized by the voters, is hereby
authorized to levy property taxes to be collected in 2024 at a rate sufficient to provide
$900,000 needed to meet debt service obligations in 2024.
SECTION 4. That a property tax levy for debt redemption of the 2015
Public Safety UTGO Bonds, as previously authorized by the voters, is hereby authorized to
levy property taxes to be collected in 2024 at a rate sufficient to provide $550,000 needed to
meet debt service obligations in 2024.
SECTION 5. 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 6. 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 ____________________, 2023
_________________________________
JEFF COUGHLIN, Council President
Approved this ________ day of ________________________, 2023
_________________________________
GREG WHEELER, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________ ________________________________
ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk KYLIE FINNELL, City Attorney
PUBLISHED the________ day of ______________________, 2023
EFFECTIVE the _________day of ______________________, 2023
ORDINANCE NO. ____________
1
Charlotte Nelson
From:Jennifer Hayes <Jennifer.Hayes@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent:Wednesday, July 26, 2023 3:47 PM
To:All City Personnel
Subject:City's Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Implementation Efforts
Please see the message below from Mayor Wheeler.
To All City Personnel:
The City of Bremerton has the most diverse populao n in Kitsap County and is represented by a variety of cultures,
experiences, and backgrounds. As a City, we are dedicated to ensuring our workforce and our pracces r epresent the
broader community and that we provide a wide range of economic, career and other opportunies that sup port a
diverse workplace.
As part of our commitment to that goal, the City has added a full-me Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) posion to
the 2023 budget to lead the City’s DEI implementao n efforts. The City has decided to hire an experienced, external
consultant to provide strategic planning and recommendaons in the development of DEI-focused objecve s along with
cra0ing a posion descripon for the DEI role.
Beginning in January 2023, I worked with an advisory group of community leaders to develop a request for proposals
(RFP) for a consultant with DEI experse to assist the City in establishing the full-me Diversity, Eq uity, and Inclusion
posion. The c ommunity leaders who all played a crucial role in the process included Anthony Ives, Execuve Director of
Kitsap Community Resources; Jill Stanton, Execuve Director of Bremerton Housing Authority; Jessica Guidry, Kitsap
Public Health District Equity Program Manager; Pastor Richmond Johnson, Mt. Zion Missionary Bapst Chu rch; Dr. Lillian
Locke;, Physician and Execuve Director of the Marv in Williams Center; Martha May, Parent Child NFP C ommunity
Health Worker, Kitsap Public Health District; Alyson Ro;er, former Kitsap Strong Co-Director; and Lucrea Robertson,
Principal and Founder of Clarity Partnerships.
The advisory group worked together to create a scope of work for the RFP along with a proposal rang c riteria with the
goal of posioning the potenal incumbent for succe ss. The advisory group determined that the scope of work should
center around stakeholder engagement -- both internal engagement with City employees and external engagement with
community members -- that would inform a strategic plan and that coordinates the City’s DEI efforts, including a
recommended job descripon and recruitment process for the City’s new DEI posion, and recommend suppo rt and
resources necessary for the new DEI posion’s work with the Race Equity Advisory Commission.
A0er reviewing three responsive proposals, MFR Coaching and Consulng was selected for this project. MFR Coaching
and Consulng was chosen because of their in-depth experse partnering with organizaons to build capa city for DEI
and culture change through a human-centered approach with staff, leaders, and stakeholders in the community. The
City has also hired Lucrea Robertson of Clarity Pa rtnerships as project manager on the City’s behalf. Ms. Robertson has
es to Bremerton, experse working as a DEI profess ional, and will liaise with the project consultant to support project
objecves. She will be able to leverage community connecons and ensure the project stays on track. MFR Coaching
and Consulng and Ms. Robertson were hired based on their in-depth experse and involvement with DEI p lans for
other organizaons and their people-focused approac h working with employees and community stakeholders.
In the next few weeks, we will be reaching out to employees to schedule group meengs (facilitated dis cussions) which
are designed to assess the City’s workplace culture and workforce/leadership DEI capacity and skills. We will be pu@ng
together four groups of employees with a max of 25 per group. Each group will meet two mes for appro ximately two
2
hours. We want to emphasize that your input in these discussions will be confidenal and nothing that you say will be
individually a;ributable to you.
We will share more informaon as we get further in this process. We are commi;ed to building a culture where
everyone belongs and thrives. Your candid feedback will allow us to reach that goal.
We look forward to beginning this process and working with staff to advance our DEI efforts within the City. Please email
Charlo;e Nelson at charlo;e.nelson@ci.bremerton.wa.us if you are interested in volunteering to parcipat e in these
facilitated discussions or have any quesons.
- Mayor Greg Wheeler
Project Overview
Jennifer Hayes
Executive Assistant to the Mayor
City of Bremerton Mayor’s Office
345 6th Street, Suite 100
Bremerton WA 98337
360 473-5266 office
360 473-5883 fax
jennifer.hayes@ci.bremerton.wa.us
City of BremertonDiversity, Equity, & Inclusion Project Update & Information on Next Steps October 25, 2023ItItem Bem B
Agenda•Introductions•Project Overview•Timeline•Next Steps
Project OverviewThe City outlined four objectives, with corresponding outcomes, it would like accomplished:OUTCOMESOBJECTIVESOutcome 1: Solicit community input that informs:•The creation and implementation of a strategic plan•The creation of a job description and recruitment strategy for a DEI position•Recommend support necessary for a race equity focused community advisory commission.Stakeholder Engagement (Internal & External)Outcome 2: Assess the City’s workplace culture and workforce /leadership DEI capacity and skillsOutcome 1: Create a job description and recruitment plan for the City’s DEI position.Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion PositionOutcome 1: Provide a framework and resources for the Race Equity Advisory Commission to fulfill the commission’s duties as established by the City Council.Race Equity Advisory CommissionOutcome 1: Provide a DEI Strategic Plan inclusive of:•Stakeholder Engagement Objectives•DEI Position Objectives•Race Equity Advisory Commission Objectives•Strategies, policies, and procedures that advance equality and inclusion in the community & workplace.•Estimated costs and resources necessary for a DEI Strategic Plan Implementation, preferably with a phased approach.Strategic Planning
OBJECTIVE: Stakeholder EngagementDELIVERABLESOUTCOMECommunity Facilitated Dialogues (External Stakeholder Engagement)•Conduct up to six (6), 90-minute facilitated discussions with community stakeholders.•Sessions may be in-person and/or virtual.•25 participants per session (to be finalized with City upon contractual agreement). •Partner on outreach to increase participation and representation across the community.•City to provide accessibility accommodations, as applicable.Outcome 1: Solicit community input that informs:•The creation and implementation of a strategic plan•The creation of a job description and recruitment strategy for a DEI position•Recommend support necessary for a race equity focused community advisory commission.Outcome 2: Assess the City’s workplace culture and workforce /leadership DEI capacity and skillsWorkforce Facilitated Dialogues (Internal Stakeholder Engagement)•Conduct facilitated discussions for four groups (~25% of the workforce) .•Each group will participate in two (2), two-hour sessions (total 4 hours per participant).•Sessions may be in-person and/or virtual.•25 participants per session.•City to provide accessibility accommodations, as applicable.Strategic Source Review•Review of strategic source documents. City to provide source documents.NOTE: All results and recommendations resulting from the Stakeholder Engagement objective will be included in theDEI Strategic PlanRecommendationReport.This report may be released in phases, peragreementbetween the City and MFRCC, as deliverables are completed.
OBJECTIVE: Diversity, Equity, & INCLUSION POSITIONDELIVERABLESOUTCOME•City of Bremerton DEI Manager Job Description.•City of Bremerton Equitable Recruiting Plan.•Stakeholder Engagement Results & Recommendations specific to the DEI Position objective.MFRCC Approach: •Integrate stakeholder feedback solicited in Objective 1.•Review comparative job descriptions and salary ranges, geographically and within local governments.•Recommend equity-based hiring and recruitment strategies that are transferable to the City's hiring across the organization.Outcome 1: Create a job description and recruitment plan for the City’s DEI position.NOTE: All results and recommendations resulting from the Stakeholder Engagement objective will be included in theDEI Strategic PlanRecommendationReport.This report may be released in phases, peragreementbetween the City and MFRCC, as deliverables are completed.
OBJECTIVE: RACE EQUITY ADVIORY COMMISSIONDELIVERABLESOUTCOME•Designate a facilitated dialogue outlined in Objective 1, Stakeholder Engagement, to include current Race Equity Advisory Committee members (past and present) , council members, and other community stakeholders to determine strengths, gaps, and needs with the current committee structure and effectiveness.•Review the City Council's established charter, and all related documents, for the Race Equity Advisory Commission (Strategic Source Review) .•Review comparative commissions, geographically and within local governments.•Review and incorporate innovate ideas with regard to frameworks, procedures, policies, and practices occurring in comparable DEI Advisory Committees in the private sector.•Recommend equity and inclusive based practices and behaviors that are transferable across the City's commissions, City Council, and workforce.Outcome 1: Provide a framework and resources for the Race Equity Advisory Commission to fulfill the commission’s duties as established by the City Council.NOTE: All results and recommendations resulting from the Stakeholder Engagement objective will be included in theDEI Strategic PlanRecommendationReport.This report may be released in phases, peragreementbetween the City and MFRCC, as deliverables are completed.
OBJECTIVE: RACE EQUITY ADVIORY COMMISSIONDELIVERABLESOUTCOMEMFRCC Approach:MFRCC approaches this final objective as the culmination of all the work outlined previously in this proposal.Outcome 1: Provide a DEI Strategic Plan inclusive of:•Stakeholder Engagement Objectives•DEI Position Objectives•Race Equity Advisory Commission Objectives•Strategies, policies, and procedures that advance equality and inclusion in the community & workplace.•Estimated costs and resources necessary for a DEI Strategic Plan Implementation, preferably with a phased approach.NOTE: All results and recommendations resulting from the Stakeholder Engagement objective will be included in theDEI Strategic PlanRecommendationReport.This report may be released in phases, peragreementbetween the City and MFRCC, as deliverables are completed.
JUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVProject Kick-OffNov 30: DEI Strategic Plan Recommendation ReportTIMELINE•Facilitated Dialogues (Internal)•Facilitated Dialogues (External)•Strategic Source Review•DEI Job Description•Equitable Recruiting Plan•Race Equity Advisory Commission Framework & Resources•DEI Strategic Plan
Next Steps
1
Charlotte Nelson
From:Jennifer Hayes <Jennifer.Hayes@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent:Wednesday, September 27, 2023 4:39 PM
To:All City Personnel
Subject:Additional Sessions Added - DEI Facilitated Discussions
Please see the message below from Mayor Wheeler:
To all City Personnel,
In July, I shared with all of you the commitment that the City has to ensuring our workforce and our pracces represent
the broader community and provides a wide range of economic and career opportunies within a diverse w orkplace.
To advance our Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts in the workplace, we hired MFR Coaching & Consulng
(MFRCC) to assist us as we move forward to shape a DEI strategic plan and create a job descripon and recruitment
process for a DEI posion.
As you recall and as part of this work, MFRCC is holding group meengs (facilitated discussions) with employees to
assess the City’s workplace culture and workforce leadership DEI capacity and skills. These discussions were scheduled
for both non-managers/non-supervisors and separately for managers/supervisors.
The inial discussions occurred last week and conn ue into this week. Employees parcipang in the dis cussions so far
have shared with the MFRCC team that they are hopeful that an addional non-manager/non-supervisor dis cussion can
be scheduled to give more opportunity for employee input.
In response, we have scheduled an addional non-manager/non-supervisor group with MFRCC next week to obtain
addional employee input for the internal facilitat ed discussions.
Please see the sessions below (must a0end both sessions):
Format Session 1:
Capture feedback from the employees’
perspecve on workplace culture and
workforce/leadership diversity, equity,
and inclusion (DEI) capacity/skills.
Session 2:
Solicit soluons to any idenfied
culture issues and related DEI skill
building for the City's workforce
and leadership.
Locaon
In Person Mon., Oct. 2nd | 2:00 – 4:00 pm Tues., Oct. 3rd | 2:00 – 4:00 pm Oyster
Bay
Training
Room
I encourage any employee who has not previously parcipated and wants to do so to a0end.
MFRCC has noted previously that your input in these discussions will be confidenal and nothing that you say will be
individually a0ributable to you. This includes notes. They do not take notes that include individuals' names, idenes, or
a0ributable informaon. I strongly support this con fidenality and ask that all parcipants honor their colleagues in this
way as part of the DEI discussion sessions.
To register for the sessions above, please click here.
2
I value your input so that, together, we may shape an inclusive culture in the City.
--Mayor Greg Wheeler
Jennifer Hayes
Executive Assistant to the Mayor
City of Bremerton Mayor’s Office
345 6th Street, Suite 100
Bremerton WA 98337
360 473-5266 office
360 473-5883 fax
jennifer.hayes@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Form Created 5/4/15
INFORMATION ONLY ITEM
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Discussion on City Charter
Section 18 relating to the City Auditor
Study Session Date: October 25, 2023
Presenter: Kylie Finnell
Jeff Coughlin
Phone: (360) 473-2345
SUMMARY: Review and discussion of Section 18 of the City Charter relating to the City Auditor and
staffing.
Section 18 City Auditor:
There shall be an Auditing Committee consisting of two Council members and an independent
Certified Public Accountant to be designated by Council, and two Bremerton residents selected by
the designated members of the Auditing Committee. The Auditing Committee shall appoint a City
Auditor who shall serve at the pleasure of the Committee. The City Auditor shall only be removed by
the majority vote of the entire membership of the Committee sitting as a whole.
HANDOUTS: N/A
STUDY SESSION AGENDA: ☒ No Presentation ☐ Full Presentation
C1
From: Anna Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2023 12:24 PM
To: Jennifer Chamberlin <Jennifer.Chamberlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Denise Frey
<Denise.Frey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Quinn Dennehy
<Quinn.Dennehy@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Michael Goodnow <Michael.Goodnow@ci.bremerton.wa.us>;
Eric Younger <eric.younger@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Livability (Agenda Item B3)
Good afternoon, all.
Let's spend 20 minutes tonight defining Livability in relation to Transportation.
The Transportation Element documents contain a number of references to "Livability". When
Council visited the shipyard last year, we were asked if the focus should be on Accessibility
(Capacity) or Livability. Our strong consensus was Livability.
My constituents define Livability as it affects residential streets. Not one person has asked for
faster arterials. Here's what they've said they want: slow down speeders, install speed cushions
(speed bumps), add crosswalks, add sidewalks, more 4-way stops, add Sunday service, do the
6th St Road Diet, pave roads so edges are safe for bikes to travel in bike lanes.
What do your constituents want? We're reviewing the Joint Compatibility Transportation Plan
soon, which states that its focus is on Livability. It would be good to have a better handle on the
term before then.
That's all from me. See you tonight,
Anna
Anna Mockler
Bremerton City Councilor, District Six
C2