HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/22/2025 STUDY SESSION AGENDA PACKET______________________________________________________________
CITY COUNCIL 345 6th Street, Suite 100, Bremerton, WA 98337 Phone (360) 473-5280
* * * A M E N D E D * * *
JANUARY 22, 2025
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
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 February 5, 2025 City Council Meeting Agenda, or as indicated…
Members of the public may click the link below to join the webinar:
https://bremertonwa-gov.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 and Passcode: 857582
A. INFORMATION ONLY PRESENTATION
1. Puget Sound Energy Pole Mounted Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Program Overview –
Public Works & Utilities Director Tom Knuckey; Kate Hartgering and Kerrie McNeal, PSE
B. AGENDA BILL BRIEFINGS
1. Approval for Fire Department to apply for FEMA Assistance to Firefighter Grant
2. Approval for Police Department to apply for Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant
3. Agreement with Schneider Water Services for the Well 9A Drilling Project
4. Contract Modification No. 6 with Parametrix, Inc. for Engineering Services During Construction for
the Kitsap Lake Park Renovation Project
5. Contract Modification No. 3 with Parametrix, Inc. for Engineering Services During Construction for
the Haddon Park Renovation Project
6. Amendment No. 3 to Claims Administration Agreement with Helmsman Management Services
LLC dba Eberle Vivian, Inc.
7. Ordinance to amend BMC Chapter 2.09 relating to the Department of Financial Services
8. Ordinance to correct legislative markup errors in Ordinance No. 5506 Item added
9. Supplemental Agreement No. 4 with HDR Engineering, Inc. for the Naval Avenue: 1st Street to
15th Street Pedestrian & Bicycle Enhancements Project (Continued discussion…)
C. GENERAL COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee Briefing (Last Meetings 12/12/24 & 1/10/25) – Chair Chamberlin
2. Public Works Committee Briefing (Last Meeting 1/21/25) – Chair Rebelowski
3. Discussion on Proposed Topics for February 8 Joint Planning Session – President Younger
4. Regional and Other Committee/Board Briefings
5. Other General Council Business (As necessary, and as time allows…)
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.
D. EXECUTIVE SESSION
1. 15-Minutes to discuss Pending Litigation as allowed under RCW 42.30.110 (1)(i); and no action is
anticipated Item added
E. ADJOURNMENT OF STUDY SESSION
Form Updated 4.19.2024
INFORMATION ONLY ITEM
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY: PSE is partnering with local communities to install pole-mounted electric vehicle
charging stations in the right-of-way for public use. PSE will present an overview of the program
along with their plans for community engagement, location selection, and timeline to implement the
program in Bremerton.
SUBJECT: Puget Sound Energy Pole
Mounted Electric Vehicle Charging Stations
Program Overview
Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Presenter: T. Knuckey, Kate
Hartgering & Kerrie
McNeal (PSE)
Phone: (360) 473-2376
HANDOUTS:
A1
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Approval for Fire Department to apply for
FEMA Assistance to Firefighter Grant
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: Fire
Presenter: Chief Pat McGanney
Phone: (360) 473-5380
SUMMARY: The Fire Department would like to apply for an Assistance to Firefighter Grant (AFG)
through FEMA to purchase Four FERNO Power Stair chairs. This grant requires a 10% city match.
The total grant request is for $52,647.72. The City’s portion would be $5,264.77.
ATTACHMENTS: None
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The fiscal impact would be $5,264.77. This would
come out of the Fire budget.
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to authorize the Bremerton Fire Department to submit an Assistance to Firefighter Grant
application through FEMA for the purchase of four FERNO Power Stair chairs.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 04/19/2024
B1
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Approval for Police Department to apply for
Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance
Grant
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: Police
Presenter: Lt. Ryan Heffernan
Phone: (360) 473-5777
SUMMARY:
The Bremerton Police Department is applying for the local solicitation of the Edward Byrne Memorial
Justice Assistance Grant (JAG). Funding has been used to help fund the salary for the position in
the Community Resources Unit. The grant will allow the City to continue with the Unit and its crime
prevention function and programs. The grant is from the Department of Justice. No matching funds
are required of the City. Bremerton PD will request $14,524.00 from the DOJ.
ATTACHMENTS: Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Application
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Grant, and to 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 04/19/2024
B2
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Agreement with Schneider Water Services
for the Well 9A Drilling Project
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: Public Works & Utilities
Presenter: Bill Davis
Phone: (360) 473-2312
SUMMARY: The Well 9 site is located in Kitsap County at 318 Firway Lane off of Central Valley
Road. The original well (Well 9) was drilled in 1977. This well was taken out of service in 2010 after
the production significantly dropped. The City’s hydrogeologist concluded that rehabilitation of the
existing well would have limited benefit due to the amount of sand being produced and a new well
should be drilled. The City will be drilling a new well (Well 9A) at the site. The City redeveloped the
site in 2023 to increase the area for large well drilling equipment and tanks. The new well will be
drilled in 2025 and the site will be completed with controls and chlorination in 2026 under a separate
contract.
Three bids were received, which were opened on December 16, 2024. The low responsive,
responsible bidder was Schneider Water Services, who submitted a bid in the amount of
$1,570,132.20, which includes sales tax.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Contract; 2. Location Map; 3. Bid Tabulation
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): This project is included in the Water Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP). A budget adjustment of $350,000 is required, which will increase the
budget from $1,537,550 to $1,887,550.
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to award the contract with Schneider Water Services for the Well 9A Drilling project in the
amount of $1,570,132.20, which includes sales tax, and authorize the Mayor to finalize and execute
the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented; and further authorize
a budget adjustment of $350,000.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 04/19/2024
B3
Well 9A Drilling Agreement
December 2024 00 52 00-1
SECTION 00 52 00
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is dated the day of in
the
year 2025 by and between City of Bremerton (hereinafter called OWNER) and
(hereinafter called CONTRACTOR).
OWNER and CONTRACTOR, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth,
agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1. WORK.
CONTRACTOR shall complete the WORK as specified or indicated in the OWNERS's
Contract Documents titled WELL 9A DRILLING.
ARTICLE 2. CONTRACT TIMES.
The WORK shall obtain Substantial Completion within 180-calendar days from the
commencement date stated in the Notice to Proceed. Time is of the essence as to each and
every deadline set forth in this agreement. This provision has been specifically negotiated.
Final Completion and Acceptance of WORK shall be achieved no later than 30 calendar
days following Substantial Completion.
ARTICLE 3. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES.
OWNER and the CONTRACTOR recognize that time is of the essence for this Agreement
and that the OWNER will suffer financial loss if the WORK is not completed within the time
specified in Article 2 herein, plus any extensions thereof allowed in accordance with Article
12 of the General Conditions and Supplementary Conditions. They also recognize the
delays, expense, and difficulties involved in proving in a legal proceeding the actual loss
suffered by the OWNER if the WORK is not completed on time. Accordingly, instead of
requiring any such proof, the CONTRACTOR shall pay the OWNER liquidated damages for
the delay (Not as a penalty) in the amount of $1000 per day that expires after the time
specified in Article 2.
ARTICLE 4. CONTRACT PRICE.
OWNER shall pay CONTRACTOR for completion of the WORK in accordance with the
Contract Documents in the amount set forth in the Bid Schedule(s).
ARTICLE 5. PAYMENT PROCEDURES.
CONTRACTOR shall submit Applications for Payment in accordance with Article 14 of the
General Conditions. Applications for Payment will be processed by ENGINEER as provided
in the General Conditions.
Contractor Initials
Well 9A Drilling Agreement
December 2024 00 52 00-2
ARTICLE 6. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
The Contract Documents which comprise the entire agreement between OWNER and
CONTRACTOR concerning the WORK consist of this Agreement (Section 00500) and the
following which are either attached or incorporated herein by reference:
• Notice Inviting Bids (Section 00 11 16)
• Bidders Checklist (Section 00 11 16.1)
• Bid Proposal including the Bid, Bid Schedule(s), Information Required of Bidder, Bid
Bond, and all required certificates and affidavits (Section 00 41 00)
• Performance Bond (Section 00 61 13.13)
• Payment Bond (Section 00 61 13.16)
• General Conditions (Section 00 72 00)
• Supplementary General Conditions (Section 00 73 00)
• Technical Specifications and Appendices as listed in the Table of Contents
• Drawings as listed in the List of Drawings
• Addenda numbers to , inclusive
• Change Orders which may be delivered or issued after Effective Date of the
Agreement and are not attached hereto
There are no Contract Documents other than those listed in this Article 6. The Contract
Documents may only be amended by Change Order as provided in Section 3.04 of the
General Conditions.
ARTICLE 7. WAIVER OF IMMUNITY.
The CONTRACTOR and OWNER acknowledge and agree that they have negotiated the
following in accordance with the requirements of RCW 4.24.115 and the CONTRACTOR
specifically waives his immunity under industrial insurance under Title 51 RCW. The
CONTRACTOR and OWNER acknowledge and agree to the requirements for
indemnification in Sections 6.20 of the General Conditions and Supplementary Conditions.
The provisions of this section shall survive the termination of the contract.
ARTICLE 8. SUSPENSION OF WORK AND TERMINATION.
The CONTRACTOR agrees to the right of the OWNER to suspend work or terminate this
agreement as indicated in Article 15 of the General Conditions and Supplementary
Conditions.
Contractor Initial
Well 9A Drilling Agreement
December 2024 00 52 00-3
ARTICLE 9. ASSIGNMENT
No assignment by a party hereto of any rights under or interests in the Contract Documents
will be binding on another party hereto without the written consent of the party sought to be
bound; and specifically but without limitation monies that may become due and monies that
are due may not be assigned without such consent (except to the extent that the effect of
this restriction may be limited by law), and unless specifically stated to the contrary in any
written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from
any duty or responsibility under the Contract Documents. The OWNER, in its sole discretion,
may refuse to allow the CONTRACTOR to assign any or all of its duties, rights and/or
responsibilities under the Agreement, except with regards to an assignment of funds for
security purposes. In the case of an assignment for security purposes the CITY may
condition its approval to the extent it deems necessary to assure that there will be adequate
funds to complete the WORK and to pay subcontractors and suppliers.
OWNER and CONTRACTOR each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal
representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns and legal
representatives in respect of all covenants, agreements and obligations contained in the
Contract Documents.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, OWNER and CONTRACTOR have caused this Agreement to be
executed the day and year first above written.
OWNER: City of Bremerton CONTRACTOR
(Signature) (Signature)
By By
(Printed name) (Printed name) [CORPORATE SEAL]
Attest Attest
Address for giving notices: Address for giving notices:
City of Bremerton
345 6th Street, Suite 100
Bremerton, WA 98337
License No.
Approved as to Form:
(Signature)
Agent for service of process:
City Attorney
(Title)
PROJECT LOCATION MAP – WELL 9A DRILLING
SALES TAX TOTAL132,282.20 1,570,132.20172,227.68 2,044,267.68145,932.42 1,732,154.42Schneider Equipment, Inc 12:31 X 1,437,850.00CITY OF BREMERTONBID TABULATIONBOND BASE BID NAME OF BIDDEROPENED BY:12/16/2024TIME OPENED:Well 9A Drilling1:00PM Rachel KochaAngela HooverBID TITLE:Tacoma Pump & Drilling Co Inc 11:14 X 1,586,222.00Holt Services Inc. 11:40 X 1,872,040.00SECOND LOW BIDDER $ 1,732,154.42 THIRD LOW BIDDER $ 2,044,267.68 DATE OPENED:RECORDED BY: $ ENGINEER ESTIMATE (INCLUDING SALES TAX)APPARENT LOW BIDDER $ 1,570,132.20 SUMMARYCURRENT SALES TAX RATE 9.20%
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Contract Modification No. 6 with Parametrix,
Inc. for Engineering Services During
Construction for the Kitsap Lake Park
Renovation Project
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: Parks & Recreation
Presenter: T. Barker
Phone: (360) 473-5428
SUMMARY: The original contract with Parametrix, Inc. was executed on 10/19/20 for $113,889.
Contract Modification No. 6 ($12,644.40) includes additional hours required during the “Engineering
Services During Construction” phase.
ATTACHMENTS: 1) Exhibit A
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Funding for this project was approved by City
Council on 7/3/24. No budget adjustment is required for Contract Modification No. 6.
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve Contract Modification No. 6 with Parametrix, Inc. for Engineering Services During
Construction for the Kitsap Lake Park Renovation 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 04/19/2024
B4
Scope of Work
60 Washington Avenue, Suite 390 • Bremerton, WA 98337 | 360.377.0014 | Parametrix.com
Exhibit A
City of Bremerton
Kitsap Lake Park Renovation Project
Change Order 6 – Additional Engineering Services During Construction
Introduction
This document describes Parametrix’s proposed scope of work (SOW) for Change Order 6 under our
existing contract. The purpose for Change Order 6 is to request budget for the following services:
1. Project Management and Meetings for extended 3 additional months of work.
2. Engineering services during construction beyond previous scope.
A proposed schedule is included in this scope as Exhibit B and our proposed budget is attached as
Exhibit C.
Task 1 – Project Management and Meetings
Objective
Continue project management through the substantial completion of the project.
Activities
The following activities will be performed as part of this task:
Manage and direct the project technical team.
Provide routine project management and communications (scope, schedule, budget, and
invoicing).
Prepare monthly progress reports and progress billings and submit to the City for approval
and payment.
Deliverables
The following deliverables are associated with this task:
Routine correspondence and monthly invoices and progress reports
Meeting agendas and notes
Assumptions
The following assumptions apply to this task:
Project duration is expected to take an additional 3 months beyond the previous estimate
because of the extended construction schedule.
Scope of Work
City of Bremerton 233-1896-174
Kitsap Lake Park Renovation Project 2 January 2025
Change Order 6 – Additional Engineering Services
Task 6 – Engineering Services During Construction
Objective
The following objectives apply to this task:
Receive compensation for engineering services during construction completed beyond
previous scope.
Receive compensation for the redesign of paths between the parking lot and beach.
Provide additional engineering support during the construction phase of the project.
Activities
The following activities have been performed as part of this task:
Attended construction meetings as requested.
Responded to applicable Contractor’s Requests for Information (RFIs) and requests for
change orders and make recommendations to the City.
Attended site walks at the request of the City.
Redesigned paths between parking lot and beach.
Revised design documents in response to changes encountered during the construction.
The following activities will be performed as part of this task:
Attend construction meetings as requested.
Review Contractor’s submittals for compliance with the specifications.
Respond to applicable Contractor’s Requests for Information (RFIs) and requests for change
orders and make recommendations to the City.
Attend site walks at the request of the City.
Revise design documents in response to changes encountered during the construction.
Deliverables
The following activities will be performed as part of this task:
Electronic copies of responses to material submittals, cut sheets, shop drawings review, RFI
responses, and revised design documents.
Assumptions
The following assumptions apply to this task:
Parametrix provided the redesign of the paths between the parking and beach
Parametrix will review and respond to RFIs at an estimated 2 hours each. It is assumed that
a total of no more than 3 additional RFIs will be reviewed (6 hours).
The Parametrix PM and/or one lead staff will attend up to 8 online meetings at 1 hour each
and 2 site meetings at 2 hours each (12 hours).
Hours for support are 14 hours for the Parametrix PM, 4 hours for the project engineer for a
total of 18 technical staff hours.
Scope of Work
City of Bremerton 233-1896-174
Kitsap Lake Park Renovation Project 3 January 2025
Change Order 6 – Additional Engineering Services
Exhibit B - Schedule
Work Element Completed By
Notice to Proceed February 3, 2025
Construction Complete February 28, 2025
Exhibit C
Client: City of Bremerton
Project:Kitsap Lake Park Improvements
Project No:233-1896-174
Shanon HarrisJason CeraldeYammie HoClara OlsonJeffrey L. CoopKyle HaleJean Johnson3.0 Project ControlsProject ManagerSenior EngineerEngineer IIIQuality Control (SD)Project AccountantSr. Contracts Specialist$143.67 $153.51 $241.92 $149.76 $243.36 $106.47 $187.17
Task Description Labor Dollars Labor Hours
01 Project Management and Meetings $3,047.37 21 7 10 0 0 0 3 1
Virtual Project Meetings (3)$460.53 3 3
Project Management (3 mo.) including scoping CO3 $2,586.84 18 7 7 3 1
06.A Schedule A Eng Services During Construction $2,751.93 18 0 15 0 3 0 0 0
Weekly Meetings (8 @ 1 hr)$1,228.08 8 8
Site Meeting (2 @ 2 hr)$614.04 4 4
RFI Responses (3 @ 2 hr)$909.81 6 3 3
06.B Schedule B Eng Services During Construction $6,845.10 43 0 34 2 6 1 0 0
Interceptor Drain Change $1,448.94 9 2 6 1
Regrade Paths between Parking and Beach $5,396.16 34 32 2
Labor Totals:82 7 59 2 9 1 3 1
Totals:$12,644.40 $1,005.69 $9,057.09 $483.84 $1,347.84 $243.36 $319.41 $187.17
Other Direct Expenses
Mileage - $0.625/mile $0.00
Other Direct Expenses Total:$0.00
Project Total $12,644.40
Billing Rates:
1/3/2025 Cost Est_01032024.xlsx
CITY OF BREMERTON
CHANGE ORDER
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO: 06
PROJECT NAME: KITSAP LAKE PARK RENOVATION PROJECT
PROJECT NO: 59163 CONTRACTOR: PARAMETRIX, INC.
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: 113,889.00 DAYS: March 2021
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
CHANGES:
109,342.21 DAYS: 0
THIS CHANGE: 12,644.40 DAYS: Feb 2025
REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT: 235,875.61 DAYS: Feb 2025
This Change Order covers changes to the subject contract as described herein. The Contractor shall
construct, furnish equipment and materials, and perform all work as necessary or required to complete
the Change Order Items. The increase or decrease in contract price shown below includes any
applicable taxes.
Rule 170 Rule 171 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES INCREASE IN
CONTRACT
AMOUNT
($)
(DECREASE) IN
CONTRACT
AMOUNT
($)
CONTRACT
TIME
EXTENSION
(DAYS:)
X
Contract Modification No. 6
Added SOW to include:
1. Project management and meetings for extended 3
months of work.
2. Engineering services during construction beyond
previous scope.
12,644.40
0.00
Feb 2025
NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT AMOUNT
INCREASE OR (DECREASE)
12,644.40
0.00 0
ESTIMATED SALES TAX AT 9.0% 0.00 0.00
TOTAL INCLUDING SALES TAX 12,644.40
0.00 0
Contractor acknowledges and accepts that this Change Order constitutes final settlement of all claims
of any kind or nature arising from or connected with any work either covered or affected by this Change
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO: _06_
PROJECT NAME: KITSAP LAKE PARK RENOVATION PROJECT
Page 2 of 2
Change Order
Rev. 06/2018
Order, including, without limitation, claims related to contract time, on-site or home office overhead, or
lost profits. Nothing in this Change Order shall limit the City’s right to bring a claim for past performance.
The undersigned Contractor approves the foregoing Change Order 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 Change Order.
This document will become a supplement of the contract and all provisions will apply hereto. It is
understood that this Change Order 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 change order
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.
CONTRACTOR
Approved: DATE:
PROJECT MANAGER
Recommended: DATE:
CITY ENGINEER
Council action is required as project cost will exceed approved budget. Yes No
Council action is required as change exceeds Mayors authority per BMC 2.76.110. Yes No
Recommended: DATE:
DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Recommended: DATE:
MAYOR
Approved: DATE:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
___
KYLIE J. FINNELL, Bremerton City Attorney ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Contract Modification No. 3 with Parametrix,
Inc. for Engineering Services During
Construction for the Haddon Park
Renovation Project
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: Parks & Recreation
Presenter: T. Barker
Phone: (360) 473-5428
SUMMARY: The original contract with Parametrix, Inc. was executed on 7/29/22 for $118,723.
Contract Modification No. 3 ($7,179.75) includes additional hours required during the “Engineering
Services During Construction” phase.
ATTACHMENTS: 1) Exhibit A
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): Funding for this project was approved by City
Council on 7/3/24. No budget adjustment is required for Contract Modification No. 3.
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve Contract Modification No. 3 with Parametrix, Inc. for Engineering Services During
Construction for the Haddon Park Renovation Project; and authorize the Mayor to finalize and
execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 04/19/2024
B5
CITY OF BREMERTON
CHANGE ORDER
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO: 03
PROJECT NAME: HADDON PARK RENOVATION PROJECT
PROJECT NO: 59167 CONTRACTOR: PARAMETRIX, INC.
ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT: 118,723.00 DAYS: 0
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
CHANGES:
47,658.26 DAYS: 0
THIS CHANGE: 7,179.75 DAYS: 0
REVISED CONTRACT AMOUNT: 173,561.01 DAYS: 0
This Change Order covers changes to the subject contract as described herein. The Contractor shall
construct, furnish equipment and materials, and perform all work as necessary or required to complete
the Change Order Items. The increase or decrease in c ontract price shown below includes any
applicable taxes.
Rule 170 Rule 171 DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES INCREASE IN
CONTRACT
AMOUNT
($)
(DECREASE) IN
CONTRACT
AMOUNT
($)
CONTRACT
TIME
EXTENSION
(DAYS:)
X
Contract Modification No. 3
Project Management and Meetings for an additional 3 months of
work. Engineering Services during construction beyond the
previous scope (e.g., PSE Coordination).
7,179.75
0.00
0
NET CHANGE IN CONTRACT AMOUNT
INCREASE OR (DECREASE)
7,179.75
0.00 0
ESTIMATED SALES TAX AT 9.0% 0.00 0.00
TOTAL INCLUDING SALES TAX 7,179.75
0.00 0
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO: _03_
PROJECT NAME: HADDON PARK RENOVATION PROJECT
Page 2 of 2
Change Order
Rev. 06/2018
Contractor acknowledges and accepts that this Change Order constitutes final settlement of all claims
of any kind or nature arising from or connected with any work either covered or affected by this Change
Order, including, without limitation, claims related to contract time, on -site or home office overhead, or
lost profits. Nothing in this Change Order shall limit the City’s right to bring a claim for past performance.
The undersigned Contractor approves the foregoing Change Order 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 Change Order.
This document will become a supplement of the contract and all provisions will apply hereto. It is
understood that this Change Order 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 change order
that is binding on the parties of this co ntract. 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.
CONTRACTOR
Approved: DATE:
PROJECT MANAGER
Recommended: NA DATE:
CITY ENGINEER
Council action is required as project cost will exceed approved budget. Yes No
Council action is required as change exceeds Mayors authority per BMC 2.76.110. Yes No
Recommended: DATE:
DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
Recommended: DATE:
MAYOR
Approved: DATE:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
___
KYLIE J. FINNELL, Bremerton City Attorney ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk
Scope of Work
City of Bremerton 233-1896-187
Haddon Park Renovation Project 1 January 2025
Change Order 3 –Engineering Service During Construction
Exhibit A
City of Bremerton
Haddon Park Renovation Project
Change Order 3 – Engineering Services During Construction
Introduction
This document describes Parametrix’s proposed scope of work (SOW) for Change Order 3 under our
existing contract. The purpose for Change Order 3 is to request budget for completion of the
following additional services:
1. Project Management and Meetings for extended 3 additional months of work.
2. Engineering services during construction beyond the previous scope.
A proposed schedule is included in this scope as Exhibit B and our proposed budget is attached as
Exhibit C.
Task 01 – Project Management and Meetings
Objectives
The objective of this task is to provide overall project management of the consultant contract with
City of Bremerton.
Activities
This task includes general management functions that include the following:
Manage and direct the project technical team.
Provide routine project management and communications (scope, schedule, budget, and
invoicing).
Prepare monthly progress reports and progress billings and submit to the City for approval
and payment.
Deliverables
The following deliverables are associated with this task:
Routine correspondence and monthly progress reports
Meeting agendas and notes
Assumptions
The following assumptions apply to this task:
Project duration is extended for engineering services during construction expected to be
complete February 28, 2024.
Scope of Work
City of Bremerton 233-1896-187
Haddon Park Renovation Project 2 January 2025
Change Order 3 –Engineering Service During Construction
Task 05 – Engineering Services During Construction
Objectives
The following objectives apply to this task:
Compensation for engineering support during the construction services beyond the previous
scope.
Compensation for coordination with Puget Sound Energy.
Activities
The following activities as associated with this task:
Attend construction meetings as requested.
Review Contractor’s submittals for compliance with the specifications.
Respond to applicable Contractor’s Requests for Information (RFIs) and requests for change
orders and make recommendations to the City.
Attend site walks at the request of the City.
Revise design documents in response to changes encountered during construction.
Deliverables
The following deliverables are associated with this task:
Electronic copies of responses to material submittals, cut sheets, shop drawing review, RFI
responses, and revised design documents.
Assumptions
The following assumptions apply to this task:
Parametrix will not be responsible for daily construction administration or inspections.
Parametrix will attend 4 additional virtual construction meetings. These meetings should
take 1 hour each.
The Parametrix PM will attend up to 1 site meeting. This visit should take 2 hours.
Total Parametrix hours for support: 12 hours for the project manager and 8 hours for the
project electrical designer.
Scope of Work
City of Bremerton 233-1896-187
Haddon Park Renovation Project 3 January 2025
Change Order 3 –Engineering Service During Construction
Exhibit B - Schedule
Work Element Completed By
Notice to Proceed
Construction Complete
February 3, 2025
February 28, 2025
EXHIBIT C
Client: City of Bremerton
Project:Haddon Park Renovation
Project No:233-1896-187
Shanon HarrisJason CeraldeJeff ReinmuthDenise PetersonKyle HaleJean Johnson3.0 Project ControlsProject ManagerSenior Electrical DesignerElectrical Designer IIIProject AccountantSr. Contracts Specialist$143.67 $153.51 $193.56 $165.24 $106.47 $187.17
Task Description Labor Dollars Labor Hours
01 Project Management and Meetings $3,663.96 26 8 11 0 0 6 1
Virtual Project Meetings (3 ea - 1 per month)$460.53 3 3
Project Management (3 months beyond previous scope)$3,203.43 23 8 8 6 1
05 Engineering Services During Construction $3,515.79 21 0 13 7 1 0 0
Weekly Construction Meetings (4)$807.60 5 4 1
Site Visit (1)$307.02 2 2
Coordination with Puget Sound Energy $1,480.11 8 1 6 1
Review and respond to RFIs beyond previous scope $921.06 6 6
Labor Totals:47 8 24 7 1 6 1
Totals:$7,179.75 $1,149.36 $3,684.24 $1,354.92 $165.24 $638.82 $187.17
Other Direct Expenses
Mileage - $0.67/mile $0.00
Other Direct Expenses Total:$0.00
Project Total $7,179.75
Billing Rates:
1/3/2025 Haddon CO3_Cost Est_01032024.xlsx
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Amendment No. 3 to Claims Administration
Agreement with Helmsman Management
Services LLC dba Eberle Vivian, Inc.
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: City Attorney’s Office /
Risk Management
Presenter: Kylie Finnell / Melisa
Folmer
Phone: (360) 473-5302
SUMMARY: The City entered into agreement with Helmsman Management Services LLC dba
Eberle Vivian, Inc. for workers’ compensation claims administration services in 2017. This
agreement was extended from 2021 to January 31, 2025. The proposed amendment extends the
agreement for an additional two years at the rate of $35,563.32 for the first year and $36,985.82 for
the second year. The first additional year is a $3,457.77 increase from last year.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Amendment No. 3 to Claims Administration Agreement; and
2. Claims Administration Agreement with Amendments No. 1 and 2.
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): The Risk Management Fund has adequate funds
budgeted to pay for the services.
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve Amendment No. 3 to Claims Administration Agreement with Helmsman
Management Services LLC dba Eberle Vivian, Inc. to extend workers’ compensation claims
administration services for an additional two years at the rate of $35,563.32 for the first year and
$36,985.82 for the second year 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 04/19/2024
Page 1
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF BREMERTON AND HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC
THIS AMENDMENT No. 3 to the Claims Administration Agreement (“Agreement”) is
entered into between the City of Bremerton (“Client”) and Helmsman Management Services
LLC dba Eberle Vivian, Inc. (“EV”), referred to collectively as the “Parties,” for claims
administration services.
WHEREAS, the original Agreement commenced between the Parties on February 1,
2018 and expired January 31, 2021 (“Initial Term”). At the end of that Initial Term, this
Agreement was renewed for another two (2) years expiring January 31, 2023 (“Amendment No.
1”) and an additional two (2) year term expiring January 31, 2025 (“Amendment No. 2”); and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend the current term of the Agreement for another
two (2) years, adjust the annual service fee, and make other related changes.
NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual agreement contained
herein, the Parties do hereby agree to amend the Agreement relating to term, compensation, and
other related provisions as follows:
1. The term of the Agreement is extended for an additional two (2) year term beginning
February 1, 2025 and expiring January 31, 2027.
2. Client will pay a service fee in the amount of $35,563.32 per year to EV for the claims
administration services detailed in the Agreement and rendered between February 1, 2025
and January 31, 2026.
3. For the year February 1, 2026 through January 31, 2027, fees will increased 4% to
$36,985.82.
4. All other terms of the Agreement as amended shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 3 as of
the date and year written below.
Signatures on next page.
Page 2
HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES
LLC dba EBERLE VIVIAN, INC.
By: EMILY DREW, Manager
DATE:
CITY OF BREMERTON
GREG WHEELER, Mayor
DATE:
ATTEST:
ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
KYLIE FINNELL, City Attorney
R:\Legal\Legal\Contracts\RISK\Eberle Vivian\Eberle Vivian Amendment 3.doc
Page 1
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF BREMERTON AND HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC
THIS AMENDMENT No. 2 to the Claims Administration Agreement (“Agreement”) is
entered into between the City of Bremerton (“Client”) and Helmsman Management Services
LLC dba Eberle Vivian, Inc. (“EV”), referred to collectively as the “Parties,” for claims
administration services.
WHEREAS, the original Agreement commenced between the Parties on February 1,
2018 and expired January 31, 2021 (“Initial Term”). At the end of that Initial Term, this
Agreement was renewed for another two (2) years expiring January 31, 2023 (“Amendment No.
1”); and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend the current term of the Agreement for another
two (2) years, adjust the annual service fee, and make other related changes.
NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual agreement contained
herein, the Parties do hereby agree to amend the Agreement relating to term, compensation, and
other related provisions as follows:
1. The term of the Agreement is extended for an additional two (2) year term beginning
February 1, 2023 and expiring January 31, 2025.
2. Client will pay a service fee in the amount of $32,105.55 per year to EV for the claims
administration services detailed in the Agreement and rendered between February 1, 2023
and January 31, 2024.
3. For the year February 1, 2024 through January 31, 2025, fees will increase by an amount
equal to the Seattle Metro Area Consumer Price Index, plus two percent.
4. All other terms of the Agreement as amended shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 2 as of
the date and year written below.
Signatures on next page.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 71C1746C-1C05-4B94-B8A4-8CE34AE95E8A
Page 2
HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES
LLC dba EBERLE VIVIAN, INC.
By: EMILY DREW, Manager
DATE:
CITY OF BREMERTON
GREG WHEELER, Mayor
DATE:
ATTEST:
ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
KYLIE FINNELL, City Attorney
R:\Legal\Legal\Contracts\RISK\Eberle Vivian\Eberle Vivian Amendment 2.doc
1/9/2023
DocuSign Envelope ID: 71C1746C-1C05-4B94-B8A4-8CE34AE95E8A
1/18/2023
Page 1
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITY OF BREMERTON AND HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES LLC
THIS AMENDMENT No. 1 to the Claims Administration Agreement (“Agreement”) is
entered into between the City of Bremerton (“Client”) and Helmsman Management Services
LLC dba Eberle Vivian, Inc. (“EV”), referred to collectively as the “Parties,” for claims
administration services.
WHEREAS, the current Agreement commencing between the Parties on February 1,
2018 expires January 31, 2021 (“Initial Term”). At the end of the Initial Term, this Agreement
may, at the sole discretion of the Client, be renewed up to two (2) terms of two (2) years each,
with the same terms and conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Client shall pay a service fee of $28,950 per year for claims
administration services within the contract period. The contract period will include the Initial
Term of this Agreement and two (2) optional years, if exercised.
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend the current term of the Agreement for another
two years and to make other related changes.
NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual agreement contained
herein, the Parties do hereby agree to amend the Agreement relating to term, compensation, and
other related provisions as follows:
1. The term of the Agreement is extended for an additional two (2) year term beginning
February 1, 2021 and expiring January 31, 2023. Client will pay EV $28,950 per year for
the claims administration services detailed in the Agreement and rendered during this
additional two (2) year term.
2. All other terms of the Agreement as amended shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 1 as of
the date and year written below.
Signatures on next page.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2F908CEF-D0B7-475C-B3D0-770182762BD8
Page 2
HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES
LLC dba EBERLE VIVIAN, INC.
By: LISA VIVIAN, President
DATE:
CITY OF BREMERTON
GREG WHEELER, Mayor
DATE:
ATTEST:
ANGELA WOODS, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney
R:\Legal\Legal\Contracts\RISK\Eberle Vivian\Eberle Vivian Amendment 1.doc
November 23, 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2F908CEF-D0B7-475C-B3D0-770182762BD8
11/30/2020
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Ordinance to amend BMC Chapter 2.09
relating to the Department of Financial
Services
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: Finance
Presenter: Kylie Finnell, City
Attorney
Mike Riley, Director of
Financial Services
Phone: (360) 473-2345
SUMMARY: Ordinance to change the title of Department of Financial Services to “Department of
Financial and Administrative Services” and the title of Director of Financial Services to “Director of
Financial and Administrative Services” to more accurately convey the role of the Department and
Director.
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. ______ amending titles of Department of Financial Services and
Director of Financial Services
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): No impact to budget.
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve Ordinance No. _______ amending titles of Department of Financial Services and
Director of Financial Services to “Department of Financial and Administrative Services” and “Director
of Financial and Administrative Services”
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 04/19/2024
B7
Page 1 of 19
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, amending Chapter 2.09 of the
Bremerton Municipal Code relating to the Department of
Financial Services, and further amending various Chapters of the
Bremerton Municipal Code that make reference to the title of the
Department or Director of the Department of Financial Services,
including Chapter 2.05.10 entitled “Departments”, Chapter
2.28.030 entitled "Equal Employment Opportunity Program”,
Chapter 2.40.030 entitled "Salaries and Personal Expenses”,
Chapter 2.74 entitled "Travel Authorization and Expense
Reimbursement”, Chapter 2.76.030 entitled "Definitions”,
Chapter 2.76.140 entitled “Credit/Purchase Card Use”, Chapter
3.01 entitled "Rates and Fees”, Chapter 3.02.010, entitled
“Budget Structure”, Chapter 3.08.040 entitled "Payment of
Claims”, Chapter 3.12.030 entitled “Funding Basis”, Chapter
3.36.030 entitled "Administration and Expenditure”, Chapter
3.49.060 entitled "Rules and Regulations”, Chapter 3.78.105
entitled "Affordable Housing Capital Fund”, Chapter 10.10
entitled "Parking Code”, Chapter 15.06.025 entitled “Sewer
Conservation Loan Program”, Chapter 15.07 entitled "Utility
Billing”, and Chapter 15.08 entitled "Appeals”.
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Bremerton Municipal Code
to change the title of the Department of Financial Services to Department of Financial and
Administrative Services to accurately reflect the full scope of the department’s work; NOW
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 2.09 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Department of Financial Services" is hereby amended to read as follows:
Chapter 2.09
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
2.09.010 DEPARTMENT CREATED.
There is hereby created the Department of Financial and Administrative Services.
(a) Divisions. The Department of Financial and Administrative Services shall
consist of the following divisions, as well as any other divisions established by the City
Council:
(1) Finance;
Page 2 of 19
(2) Information Technology; and
(3) Bremerton Kitsap Access Television (BKAT).
(b) Duties. The Director of Financial and Administrative Services shall be in charge
of the Department of Financial and Administrative Services and all divisions established
thereunder. The duties enumerated in each division as set forth in this chapter may be
reassigned within the Department of Financial and Administrative Services at the discretion of
the Director of Financial and Administrative Services for the purpose of achieving work
efficiencies. The Director of Financial and Administrative Services is also responsible for the
management of the Conference Center operating fund.
2.09.020 DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES AND DIVISION MANAGERS - POSITIONS CREATED AND
APPOINTMENT.
(a) Department Director - Appointment. There is hereby created the position of
Director of Financial and Administrative Services who shall be in charge of the Department of
Financial and Administrative Services and all divisions established thereunder. The Director of
Financial and Administrative Services shall have complete charge of all of the work of the
Department and shall be responsible for hiring and supervising employees of the Department.
The Director of Financial and Administrative Services shall be appointed by the Mayor,
subject to confirmation by the City Council, on the basis of professional experience, education
and demonstrated knowledge of accepted practices relating to the duties of the Department. All
appointees to the position of Director of Financial and Administrative Services are terminable
at will by the Mayor as set forth in Chapter 2.05 BMC.
(b) Division Managers - Appointment. There are hereby created the positions of
Assistant Director of Financial and Administrative Services, Information Technology Manager,
and Public Access Manager as managers for their respective divisions. The managers
(hereinafter "managers" or "division managers") shall manage the operations of their respective
divisions and shall report directly to the Director of Financial and Administrative Services. The
division managers shall be appointed by and shall serve at the pleasure of the Director of
Financial and Administrative Services, subject to the approval of the Mayor, on the basis of
professional experience, education and demonstrated knowledge of accepted practices relating
to the duties of the division. All appointees to the division manager positions shall serve as "at-
will" employees subject to termination by the Director of Financial and Administrative
Services without cause at any time with no notice or hearing unless otherwise provided
pursuant to an applicable rule or regulation, the City Charter, ordinance, or terms and
conditions as approved by the City Council.
2.09.030 FINANCE DIVISION CREATED - DUTIES.
There is hereby created the Finance Division for the purpose of performing all finance
and accounting functions of the City of Bremerton. The Division shall be managed by the
Assistant Director of Financial and Administrative Services who shall serve as the City
Treasurer. It shall be the duty of the Assistant Director of Financial and Administrative
Services to:
Page 3 of 19
(a) Be responsible for assisting in the management of the City’s investment and
debt portfolios.
(b) Assist City administration in budget preparation and monitoring.
(c) Maintain the accounting system in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles (GAAP).
(d) Maintain the payroll system.
(e) Exercise control of accounts payable and purchasing.
(f) Maintain an inventory of capital assets.
(g) Collect and account for all City funds.
The Assistant Director of Financial and Administrative Services shall perform such
other duties as the Mayor and Director of Financial and Administrative Services may direct or
as may be required by law.
2.09.040 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIVISION CREATED -
DUTIES.
There is hereby created the Information Technology Division for the purpose of
performing all information technology operations of the City. The Division shall be managed
by the Information Technology Manager. It shall be the duty of the Information Technology
Manager to:
(a) Direct the activities of the Information Technology Division with the
responsibility to provide technological leadership in systems planning, implementation and
support programs
(b) Direct the development and maintenance of long-range information processing
plans and budgets.
(c) Act as a contact person with user departments responding to and analyzing their
inquiries.
The Information Technology Manager shall perform such other duties as the Mayor or
the Director of Financial and Administrative Services may direct or as may be required by law.
2.09.050 BREMERTON KITSAP ACCESS TELEVISION (BKAT)
DIVISION CREATED - DUTIES.
There is hereby created the Bremerton Kitsap Access Television (BKAT) Division for
the purpose of performing all public access television functions of the City. The Division shall
be managed by the Public Access Manager. It shall be the duty of the Public Access Manager
to manage the production, programming and operating of the local access television station.
The Public Access Manager shall perform such other duties as the Mayor or the Director of
Financial and Administrative Services may direct or as may be required by law.
Page 4 of 19
SECTION 2. Chapter 2.05.010 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Departments" is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.05.010 DEPARTMENTS.
Departments of the City of Bremerton are created pursuant to the chapters and their
provisions as follows:
Chapter 2.06 Office of the City Attorney
Chapter 2.09 Department of Financial and Administrative
Services
Chapter 2.10 Department of Public Works and Utilities
Chapter 2.15 Department of Community Development
Chapter 2.16 Fire Department
Chapter 2.17 Parks and Recreation Department
Chapter 2.19 Police Department
SECTION 3. Chapter 2.28.030 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Equal Employment Opportunity Program" is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.28.030 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMITTEE.
(a) The Mayor will establish an EEO Committee with representatives from each of
the following areas:
(1) Fire Department.
(2) Police Department.
(3) Department of Financial and Administrative Services.
(4) Department of Community Development.
(5) Parks and Recreation Department.
(6) Office of the City Attorney.
(7) Bremerton Municipal Court.
(8) Department of Public Works and Utilities.
The representatives listed above shall be appointed by the department head. For the
court, the appointment shall be made by the municipal court judge. The Mayor will establish
Page 5 of 19
procedures to ensure the EEO Committee contains the widest possible minority representation.
Representatives shall serve for a period of one (1) year. Appointments shall be made
immediately following the effective date of this section and annually thereafter.
(b) The EEO Committee will assist the EEO Officers with EEO policy compliance
and complaint resolution.
SECTION 4. Chapter 2.40.030 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Salaries and Personal Expenses" is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.40.030 SALARIES AND PERSONAL EXPENSES.
The members of the Committee shall receive no salaries or other remuneration for their
services in such capacity, and shall not be entitled to personal expenses incurred by them in the
discharge of their official duties, except to the extent and purposes and amount such expense is
first authorized and approved in advance by the City of Bremerton Director of Financial and
Administrative Services.
SECTION 5. Chapter 2.74 of the Bremerton Municipal Code relating to
entitled "Travel Authorization and Expense Reimbursement" is hereby amended to read as
follows:
2.74.010 PURPOSE.
To authorize the reimbursement of expenses incurred in connection with the
performance of official City business and the use of purchase/credit cards for travel purposes,
pursuant to Chapter 42.24 RCW, and to direct the Mayor and Director of Financial and
Administrative Services to implement administrative policies and procedures to carry out the
provisions of this chapter.
2.74.020 ADVANCE AUTHORIZATION TO TRAVEL.
Travel by City officials, employees, City Council, and members of boards and
commissions shall be specifically provided for as follows:
(a) Department heads shall approve all overnight travel for employees of their
department. The Mayor shall approve overnight travel for all department heads. All out-of-
state travel for City employees must be approved by the Mayor.
(b) Travel by the Mayor is self-approved. Travel by members of the City Council
shall be approved by the Council President.
(c) Travel by members of boards and commissions shall be approved by the
Council President or Mayor.
(d) Requests must include the nature of the travel, method of travel, costs to the
City and the budgetary authority. Use of e-mail is acceptable documentation.
2.74.030 ELIGIBLE EXPENSES.
Generally, eligible expenses include travel and living costs incurred by the employee
while away from the City and expenses incurred within the City necessitated by City business.
In the Bremerton area, necessary expenses will be reimbursed only for an employee
Page 6 of 19
representing the City in his/her official capacity and in the discharge of his/her duties. Eligible
expenses and the basis for payment or reimbursement will be as follows:
(a) Registration. Actual cost of registration of any employee at a meeting,
conference, or convention for which he/she has received approval. Employees shall attend all
conferences, meetings, and training sessions that are paid for at City expense.
(b) Transportation. Actual costs for bus travel, train travel, taxi (including a
customary gratuity), car rentals, parking fees, and air travel are eligible. Employees using a
personal vehicle to travel on City business will be reimbursed at the mileage rate established by
the Internal Revenue Service. Payment shall not exceed economy class airfare (government
rate or Internet rate) to and from the same destination for employees traveling to out-of-town
destinations on City business using a personal vehicle.
(c) Lodging. Actual cost of hotel or motel accommodations is an eligible expense.
If a family member or guest accompanies the employee, the employee shall pay for the amount
over that of a single accommodation.
(d) Meals. Any employee traveling on City business will be reimbursed for meals at
the established federal per diem rate for the travel destination as established by the U.S.
General Services Administration (www.gsa.gov).
(1) An individual shall be deemed on travel status where the travel includes
reimbursable lodging.
(i) An employee must be in travel status for two (2) hours prior to
the start of their normal work time to receive a full day of per diem. Employees not in a travel
status two (2) hours prior to the start of their normal work day will receive seventy-five (75)
percent of a full day per diem.
(ii) If an employee returns from overnight travel, to their duty station
or home, more than two (2) hours after the end of their normal work day, they will receive a
full day of per diem. If they return less than two (2) hours after the end of their normal work
day, they will receive seventy-five (75) percent of a day’s per diem.
(iii) Where conference registration or training tuition fees include one
(1) or more meals, the City shall reimburse only those meals not covered by such fees. If the
employee elects not to participate in one (1) or more optional meals offered by the conference,
the following percentages of per diem will be used: Breakfast twenty (20) percent; lunch thirty
(30) percent; dinner fifty (50) percent.
(2) Reimbursement for meals incurred when an employee is away from their
duty station on official City business, but not on a travel status, will be reimbursed with
approval of the department Director using the above percentages. Expenses for meals where
City business is conducted and that could reasonably occur during non-meal periods are not
eligible for reimbursement. Meals for City Council, Mayor and City staff conducting formal
City business during meal times are specifically authorized.
Page 7 of 19
(3) All per diem meals will be handled on a reimbursement basis. Use of the
City’s purchase/credit card is not authorized for meal expenditures. Employees that will be in a
travel status and have received proper authorization to travel may receive a travel advance up
to the maximum anticipated per diem for their trip. No advance will be allowed if not in a
travel status. Settlement of advances shall be made within fifteen (15) days of return from
travel.
(e) Laundry Service. Actual cost of laundry service is an allowable expense when
employees are required to be away from the City for more than six (6) days at one (1) time or
the conditions under which they are required to work while away from the City create a more
than normal need for such services.
(f) Telephone. Charges for telephone are an allowable expense if City business
requires such communication. Employees staying outside of the City of Bremerton on business
are allowed one personal call to the employee’s home at City expense for each trip. Such calls
shall not exceed ten dollars ($10.00). Any personal calls in excess of ten dollars ($10.00) are to
be paid by the employee.
2.74.040 INELIGIBLE EXPENSES.
None of the following expenses shall be paid by the City: Travel paid for by any other
organization, alcoholic beverages, valet services, meals or lodging accommodations for family
or guest, tour bus fees for sightseeing tours, mileage if traveling as a passenger in a privately
owned car, trip insurance, hosting, tips unless otherwise authorized or any other personal
expenses for entertainment or other purposes.
2.74.050 USE OF CREDIT CARDS.
Credit cards will be made available to officials and employees for the purpose of
covering all eligible travel expenses except meals, which will be handled on a reimbursement
basis. Employees shall be restricted from use of their own personal credit cards, except in such
cases when the employee has not been issued or does not have access to a City credit card.
Disallowed charges or charges not properly identified will be paid by the employee before the
charge card billing is due.
2.74.060 DOCUMENTATION AND REIMBURSEMENT.
A report of overnight travel will be documented and submitted to the Financial and
Administrative Services Department on an Employee Claim for Expenses form within fifteen
(15) days of return from travel. The Claim will contain a complete report of all travel costs
incurred through use of a credit card or by reimbursement to the employee. The Claim shall be
submitted even if no reimbursable expenses were incurred. Requests for reimbursement for
other eligible expenses shall be submitted on an Employee Claim for Expenses no less than
monthly.
2.74.070 RIGHT OF PRIOR LIEN.
Failure to pay any disallowed credit card charges or settle any advances within the time
frame prescribed will render the employee personally liable for the unpaid amount plus interest
at the rate charged by the bank that issued the credit/purchase card or ten (10) percent,
whichever is applicable. The City shall have a prior lien against and a right to withhold any and
all funds payable or to become payable to the employee in the amount due, plus interest.
Page 8 of 19
2.74.080 ADMINISTRATION.
The Mayor and Director of Financial and Administrative Services are directed to
prepare administrative procedures necessary to implement the provisions of this chapter.
SECTION 6. Chapter 2.76.030 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Definitions" is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.76.030 DEFINITIONS.
For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions will apply:
(a) "Best bid" shall mean a bid that is the best value to and in the best interests of
the City when considering items such as price, available discounts, the product or service
purchased including any alterations or modifications thereto, shipping, time of delivery,
warranty and other terms of purchase, and any other factors relevant to the purchase. Best bid
does not necessarily mean lowest price.
(b) "Bid" shall mean an offer or quotation to provide goods and/or services at a
specified price.
(c) "Contract" or "contract for purchase" shall mean a purchase from a wholesaler,
retailer or dealer, or other similar transaction for the purchase of goods and services.
(d) "Director" shall mean the director of the department for which the contract for
purchase is made, authorized purchasing agent, or his or her designee.
(e) "Director of Financial and Administrative Services" shall mean Director of the
Department of Financial and Administrative Services, or his or her designee.
(f) "Emergency" shall mean any situation where the public health, safety and
welfare are endangered.
(g) "Purchase of goods and services" shall mean a contract to supply materials,
supplies, equipment, the lease or rental of equipment, and/or the performance of work or labor.
(h) "Written bid" or "written request for bid" shall include e-mail and facsimile
transmittals.
SECTION 7. Chapter 2.76.140 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Credit/Purchase Card Use" is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.76.140 CREDIT/PURCHASE CARD USE.
(a) The Director of Financial and Administrative Services shall implement and
maintain the following system for the distribution, authorization and control of credit/purchase
cards issued to or for the benefit of the City and used by City officials and employees.
(1) Distribution. Credit cards may be distributed to those City officials and
employees who, in the opinion of the Director of Financial and Administrative Services, have
Page 9 of 19
job responsibilities that would benefit or otherwise be facilitated by use of credit/purchase
cards.
(2) Authorization and Control. The Director of Financial and Administrative
Services shall develop specific administrative guidelines and accounting controls to ensure the
proper usage of credit/purchase cards and related funds. Credit/purchase cards are to be used
when it is in the best interest of City administrative affairs.
(3) Application. The individual holder, upon prior approval of the Director
of Financial and Administrative Services, shall use each credit/purchase card in a responsible
manner.
(4) Credit Limits. The Director of Financial and Administrative Services
shall set credit/purchase limits on each card issued subject to final approval by the Mayor.
Individual purchases shall not exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000) and in no event shall the
credit/purchase card limit exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000) for any individual
credit/purchase card account without pre-approval of the Director of Financial and
Administrative Services.
(5) Credit Card Restriction. The following will be considered an
unauthorized transaction, purchase or use of any City credit/purchase card:
(i) Cash advances;
(ii) Payment of invoices or statements;
(iii) Purchases where an open charge account would be utilized;
(iv) Personal purchases of any kind; and/or
(v) Obtaining cash refunds for goods purchased with a City
credit/purchase card.
(6) Disallowed Charges. Disallowed charges or charges not properly
identified will be paid by the employee before the charge card/purchase billing is due. Failure
to do so will render the employee personally liable where the City shall have a prior lien
against and a right to withhold any and all funds payable or to become payable to the employee
up to the unpaid amount, plus interest and/or fees at the rate charged by the bank that issued the
card. The employee shall not use the credit/purchase card if any disallowed charges are
outstanding.
The act of obtaining a City credit/purchase card does not indicate pre-approval
of expenditures.
(7) Return of Credit/Purchase Card. The employee shall return all City
credit/purchase cards at the request of the Director of Financial and Administrative Services, or
upon separation of employment. Final paycheck will be held until all outstanding City property
has been returned.
Page 10 of 19
(b) The Mayor and/or Director of Financial and Administrative Services are
authorized to implement any additional policies or administrative procedures necessary to
implement the provisions of this section.
SECTION 8. Chapter 3.01 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled "Rates
and Fees" is hereby amended to read as follows:
Chapter 3.01
RATES AND FEES
3.01.010 RATES AND FEES ESTABLISHED.
Rates and fees for services relating to the Department of Financial and Administrative
Services, Municipal Court, Department of Community Development, Police Department, Fire
Department, Parks and Recreation Department, Department of Public Works and Utilities,
Bremerton Kitsap Access Television (BKAT) and other related services are established by
resolution or ordinance and are on file with the City Clerk and may be posted or linked on the
City of Bremerton’s website.
SECTION 9. Chapter 3.02.010 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Budget Structure" is hereby amended to read as follows:
3.02.010 BUDGET STRUCTURE.
(a) Biennial Budget Established.
(1) Pursuant to RCW 35.34.040, the City Council hereby establishes a two
(2) year biennial budget for the City of Bremerton, beginning with the biennium starting on
January 1, 2025. The 2025-26 biennial budget shall be prepared, considered and adopted under
the provisions of the ordinance codified in this section and Chapter 35.34 RCW.
(2) Mid-Biennial Review and Modification. Pursuant to
Chapter 35.34 RCW, the City Council hereby provides for a mid-biennium review and
modification of the biennial budget. No sooner than eight (8) months after the start of the first
year of the fiscal biennium and no later than the first regularly scheduled City Council meeting
in November of the first year of each biennial budget, the Financial and Administrative
Services Director shall prepare proposed budget modifications to be effective the following
January 1.
SECTION 10. Chapter 3.08.040 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Payment of Claims" is hereby amended to read as follows:
3.08.040 PAYMENT OF CLAIMS.
Claims presented to the City for the payment of materials furnished or services
rendered to the City may be paid by warrant or check prior to City Council approval if the
following conditions are met:
(1) The Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tem, the Director of Financial and
Administrative Services, and any designee authorized to sign the checks or warrants, shall each
furnish an official bond for the faithful discharge of his or her duties in an amount not less than
Page 11 of 19
fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). A blanket fidelity bond applicable to such officials and
employees in addition to others in an amount not less than fifty thousand dollars ($50,000)
shall be sufficient to meet this requirement.
(2) All claims paid prior to Council approval shall require the approval of
the Director of Financial and Administrative Services or his or her designee.
(3) The City Council shall review all documentation supporting any claim
paid and for approval of all checks or warrants issued in payment of any claim at its next
regularly scheduled public meeting, subject to scheduling, but in no event, later than one (1)
month from issuance.
(4) If, upon review, the City Council disapproves a claim, the auditing
officer, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, Director of Financial and Administrative Services, and any
person signing the check shall jointly cause the disapproved claim to be recognized as a
receivable of the City and shall direct the financial and administrative services department to
pursue collection diligently until the amounts disapproved are collected or until the City
Council is satisfied and approves the claim.
(5) Notwithstanding the fact that all of the above conditions are met, the
City Council may stipulate that certain kinds or amounts of claims shall not be paid before the
City Council has reviewed the supporting documentation and approved the issue of checks or
warrants in payment of those claims.
SECTION 11. Chapter 3.12.030 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Funding Basis" is hereby amended to read as follows:
3.12.030 FUNDING BASIS.
Beginning with the City’s fiscal year 2006 budget, all capital improvement projects as
defined in this chapter will contribute to the one (1) percent for arts fund.
(a) Calculation of Contribution to Fund. The amount of the annual appropriation for
art shall be equal to one (1) percent of the total eligible funds of capital improvement projects
as follows:
(1) At a minimum, the amount budgeted for art in a capital improvement
project shall be equal to one (1) percent of the total construction costs as bid and awarded.
(2) In all cases where a capital improvement project has a scope of work
that includes both eligible and ineligible elements and categories, the budget for art shall be
calculated, at a minimum, in the eligible portions of the project. In all cases where a capital
improvement project includes a source of funds which is eligible for a public art purpose but
which may not be pooled with other funds and may not be used for another or different project,
the budget for art in that capital improvement project shall include one (1) percent of such
eligible funds.
(b) Pooling of Funds. A policy is hereby established to direct the transfer to and
pooling of all one (1) percent for arts fund program monies in the arts fund. Pooling affords the
Page 12 of 19
opportunity to look at the needs of the City as a whole and use the art monies only for those
projects which may have the greatest value and impact on communities or offer the best
opportunities for artist involvement.
(c) Appropriation of Funds. At the time a capital improvement project is proposed,
the project department shall calculate and include a budgeted line item for the arts fund
associated with each eligible project. The Finance Financial and Administrative Services
Department shall confirm the calculations and include the appropriations for art in the
proposed City budget. The amounts budgeted for the arts fund in particular projects may be
adjusted to reflect Council changes to the budget for the capital improvement project. All
amounts budgeted for the arts fund shall be transferred directly into the arts fund. Fund
transfers to the arts fund will occur as soon as practicable after a bid has been awarded for the
project.
(d) Fund Balance. Any year the year-end estimated fund balance is budgeted at less
than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), the general fund will transfer funds to the one (1) percent
for arts fund to make up the shortfall.
SECTION 12. Chapter 3.36.030 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Administration and Expenditure" is hereby amended to read as follows:
3.36.030 ADMINISTRATION AND EXPENDITURE.
The Contingency Reserve Fund shall be operated as a special revenue fund
administered by the Director of Financial and Administrative Services and the Mayor. All
monies received by the fund, together with investment earnings thereon, may be expended only
in the following manner:
(a) Emergency or Unfunded Unforeseen Expense. Funds may be expended from the
Contingency Reserve Fund in the event of 1) a bona fide emergency as defined in and pursuant
to RCW 35.33.081 and 35.33.091, as currently enacted and hereinafter amended, or 2) for an
unforeseen and unfunded expense. In either event, funds may be withdrawn from the
Contingency Reserve Fund by transfer to the appropriate operating fund authorized by
resolution or ordinance adopted by the City Council pursuant to RCW 35.33.147, as currently
enacted and hereinafter amended. A unanimous vote of all members of the City Council shall
be required to authorize fund transfer.
(b) Funds in Excess of Minimum Fund Balance. Should the balance of the
Contingency Reserve Fund at any time exceed the minimum fund balance, the excess funds
may be used for capital purchases upon City Council approval by simple majority vote.
SECTION 13. Chapter 3.49.060 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Rules and Regulations" is hereby amended to read as follows:
3.49.060 RULES AND REGULATIONS.
The Director of Financial and Administrative Services, or designee, may establish
administrative rules and regulations as deemed appropriate, consistent with this chapter for the
purpose of enforcing and carrying out its provisions.
Page 13 of 19
SECTION 14. Chapter 3.78.105 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Affordable Housing Capital Fund" is hereby amended to read as follows:
3.78.105 AFFORDABLE HOUSING CAPITAL FUND.
If an application for the multifamily tax exemption is approved, the project has
completed construction, and a final certificate of property tax exemption has been issued as set
forth in BMC 3.78.100, the Director of Financial and Administrative Services, or designee,
shall transfer to the affordable housing capital fund revenues based on the anticipated sales tax
received or to be received by the City for the construction of the project. The Director shall
determine the value of the sales tax revenues to be transferred to the fund based on (1) the
City’s portion of the current sales tax rate for the construction, and (2) the estimated cost of
construction as established in the building permit application and other relevant information as
the Director deems appropriate. Once established, the funds will be transferred to the
affordable housing capital fund at the beginning of the next fiscal year. The funds shall be used
for affordable housing projects approved by the City Council, unless the funds are otherwise
allocated by the City Council.
SECTION 15. Chapter 10.10.010 of the Bremerton Municipal Code regarding
Parking Code entitled "Definitions" is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.10.010 DEFINITIONS.
For the purpose of this chapter, the words and phrases set forth in this section are
defined as follows:
"Block" means the area comprised of properties along each side of a street between two
(2) intersections or an intersection and a road end.
"BMC" means Bremerton Municipal Code.
"Boat or vessel" means every description of watercraft used or capable of being used as
a means of transportation on the water including marine vehicle (trailered or nontrailered).
"Boat trailer" means any trailer or semi-trailer constructed and/or designed primarily to
transport or carry boats.
"City parking facility" means City-owned or City-controlled parking facility, including
parking garages and parking lots, whether paid or unpaid parking.
"Department" means the Department of Financial and Administrative Services, unless
another department is referenced.
"Director" means Director of Financial and Administrative Services or other
department director authorized by the Mayor to enforce this chapter, or their designee,
including, but not limited to, parking enforcement officer, unless another director is referenced.
Page 14 of 19
"Downtown core" means that area in downtown Bremerton from and including Warren
Avenue east to the waterfront and from and including 6th Street south to the waterfront and the
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard.
"Motor vehicle" means any self-propelled vehicle such as a car, truck, van, motorcycle,
or any other similar self-propelled vehicle.
"Paid parking zone" means the street, or part thereof, within the City where parking
spaces are restricted to paid parking.
"Parking generator" means anything that significantly increases commuter parking
demand. Examples include, but are not limited to: ferry terminals, schools, hospitals, business
districts, and military installations.
"Parking permit" means a permit issued by the City that exempts the permit holder,
when displayed properly, from the timed parking restriction in effect in the permit holder’s
restricted parking zone.
"Passenger load only zone" means a parking space reserved for active passenger
loading or unloading only. These spaces will be marked with the time restriction applicable to
them.
"Peak parking hours" means those hours in a day where a particular vicinity
experiences the greatest demand for parking.
"Permit only zone" means a prescribed area where on-street parking is reserved for the
exclusive use of the permit holders in the prescribed vicinity and their visitors holding a
permit.
"RCW" means Revised Code of Washington.
"Recreational vehicle" means a travel trailer, motor home, truck camper, or camping
trailer that is primarily designed and used as temporary living quarters, is either self-propelled
or mounted on or drawn by another vehicle, is transient and is not immobilized or permanently
affixed to a mobile home lot and further includes a dune buggy or off-road vehicle (trailered or
nontrailered).
"Resident," as used in this chapter, refers to an individual living in a dwelling unit or a
business owner operating a business on property owned or leased by the business owner.
"Resident vehicle" means a motor vehicle parked in a prescribed residential area by a
resident of the area.
"Residential area" means a contiguous area containing public rights-of-way or parts
thereof primarily abutted by residential property or residential use.
"Residential permit identification number" means a residential permit identification
number assigned to (1) a specific vehicle license plate number, and (2) a dwelling unit and/or
business location.
Page 15 of 19
"Residential restricted parking zone" means a restricted parking zone in a residential
area.
"Restricted parking zone" means an area of the City subject to parking restrictions
including time limits or other restrictions contained in this chapter including paid parking
zones, passenger load only zones, permit only zones and other restricted parking areas or
spaces both in residential and nonresidential areas.
"Street" means any right-of-way, highway, avenue, lane, road, drive, place, boulevard,
alley, way, sidewalk, planting or parking strip, shoulder and every way or place in the City of
Bremerton open as a matter of right to public vehicular travel or parking or other similar public
use.
"Trailer" means every vehicle without motive power designed to be drawn by another
vehicle and attached to the towing vehicle by means of a hitch or other connector, and
ordinarily used for transporting items upon public rights-of-way.
"Vehicle" means motor vehicle, car, truck, vehicle, van, tractor, bus, trailer (including
boat trailer with or without a boat situated thereon), recreational vehicle, tractor or semi-trailer,
motorcycle or boat or vessel (trailered or nontrailered), whether licensed or unlicensed, or
motorized or nonmotorized, unless otherwise defined.
"Visitor vehicle" means a motor vehicle parked by a person who is visiting a resident
within a residential restricted parking zone.
SECTION 16. Chapter 10.10.020 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Parking Administration" is hereby amended to read as follows:
10.10.020 PARKING ADMINISTRATION.
Collection of parking fees, maintenance of parking meters or other collection devices,
and the issuance of parking permits shall be administered by the Department of Financial and
Administrative Services, which shall promulgate procedures to administer permits as
authorized in this chapter, including processes for establishing proof of residency; vehicle
ownership, use or control; and for the revocation of permits for misuse. Appropriate parking
fee schedules, permit fees and related services as well as fines and penalties for violations shall
be set by the City Council and are set forth in Chapter 3.01 BMC. Fees may be collected by the
use of parking meters, pay boxes or other devices and through the issuance of parking permits
authorized by this chapter. The Director shall, in a manner consistent with this chapter,
establish, locate and post parking restrictions within the City rights-of-way where required to
regulate parking.
SECTION 17. Chapter 10.10.080 of the Bremerton Municipal Code regarding
Parking Code entitled "Enforcement Procedures" is hereby amended to read as follows:
Page 16 of 19
10.10.080 ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES.
(a) Enforcement Officer. The parking regulations set forth in this chapter and the
Washington Model Traffic Ordinance as adopted pursuant to Chapter 10.04 BMC shall be
enforced by the:
(1) City’s police officers and other law enforcement officers; and/or
(2) City’s parking enforcement officers, as applicable.
The City’s parking enforcement officers include parking enforcement officers with
limited commission as set forth in subsection (d) of this section and those City officials
authorized by the Director of Financial and Administrative Services or by the Director of
Public Works and Utilities to enforce provisions of this chapter.
(b) Notice of Infraction. If any vehicle is found parked, standing, or stopped in
violation of this chapter, or otherwise violates the provisions of this chapter, the enforcement
officer finding the vehicle shall take its license number and may take any other information
displayed on the vehicle which may identify its user and shall conspicuously affix to the
vehicle a notice of parking infraction. A notice of parking infraction represents a determination
that a parking infraction has been committed.
(c) Registered Owner - Responsible for Violation. In any parking violation case
involving an infraction relating to the stopping, standing, or parking of a vehicle, the registered
owner of the vehicle shall be responsible for the violation unless the registered owner can
provide proof that the vehicle was sold or stolen or other similar event in which the registered
owner had no direct or indirect control of the vehicle.
(d) Limited Commission Officers. The City’s Police Department is authorized to
appoint parking enforcement officers with a limited commission to issue notices of infractions
for violations of the City’s parking regulations
SECTION 18. Chapter 15.06.025 of the Bremerton Municipal Code regarding
Utility Billing entitled "Sewer Conservation Loan Program" is hereby amended to read as
follows:
15.06.025 SEWER CONSERVATION LOAN PROGRAM.
(a) Property owners who meet the requirements of this section may qualify for a
loan known as a sewer conservation loan pursuant to RCW 35.67.360. A sewer conservation
loan under this section is a loan from the City to a property for all, or a portion, of the GFC
established under BMC 15.06.020 and any inspection fees related to connection to the City’s
wastewater system. The principal amount of the loan authorized by this section shall not
exceed the amount of the GFC, together with inspection fees.
(b) In order for a property owner to qualify for a loan under this section, the
property to which the connection is to be made must be:
Page 17 of 19
(1) Within the City’s wastewater system;
(2) A developed lot with an existing single-family home; and
(3) Served by a septic system that has been designated as a failed septic
system by the Kitsap Public Health District.
(c) In order to qualify for a loan under this section, the property owner must:
(1) Complete a sewer conservation loan application;
(2) Pay the sewer conservation loan application fee;
(3) Have no utility shut-offs within the thirty-six (36) months prior to the
date of the sewer conservation loan application;
(4) Execute a promissory note and deed of trust under the terms set out in
this section;
(5) Pay the recording fee to record the deed of trust; and
(6) If outside City limits, agree not to protest any annexation petition that
includes the property being connected to the City’s wastewater system and grant the City a
limited power of attorney to include consent to the annexation of said property as part of any
notice of intent or petition for annexation presented to the City.
(d) The terms of the loan shall be as follows:
(1) The loan will be structured as a simple promissory note.
(2) The term of the note shall not exceed five (5) years, commencing on the
date the property owner executes the promissory note.
(3) The note will bear interest at the rate which is based on the City’s
current investment yield at the time of the loan, plus a two percent (2%) margin to cover
administrative costs and interest rate fluctuations over the loan period.
(4) The loan will be secured by a deed of trust, or such other instrument as
may be acceptable to the City Finance Financial and Administrative Director and City
Attorney.
(5) The note shall provide for acceleration of the principal upon default in
any payment. In the event of default, the City shall have all available remedies, including, but
not limited to, foreclosure of its interest in the property, notification of credit bureaus, use of
collection agencies, and terminating service.
(6) Loan principal and interest charges will be amortized and billed by the
City and due monthly. The monthly payment will be no lower than fifty dollars ($50.00).
Appropriate penalties may be imposed by the City for delinquent accounts.
(7) There shall be no penalty for prepayment.
Page 18 of 19
(8) The note will contain a due on sale clause which provides for payment in
full of all outstanding principal and interest upon sale of the property. Loans shall be limited by
available funds. The amount of available funds shall be at the discretion of the City Council
and shall be determined periodically by City Council motion, resolution, or ordinance. All
funds used for loan purposes shall be derived from operating revenues from the sale of sewer
services.
SECTION 19. Chapter 15.07.010 of the Bremerton Municipal Code regarding
Utility Billing entitled "Purpose" is hereby amended to read as follows:
15.07.010 PURPOSE.
The provisions in this chapter provide for the establishment of a City billing and
receipting system for the reimbursement of the costs of providing utility service.
The City is additionally authorized to provide to other municipal corporations billing
and accounting services through interlocal agreement approved by the Mayor and authorized
by the City Council.
Utility billing shall be processed and administered by the Department of Financial and
Administrative Services.
SECTION 20. Chapter 15.07.020 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Utility Service Accounts" is hereby amended to read as follows:
15.07.020 UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS.
The City shall create a utility service account upon receipt of an executed utility service
agreement or an executed owner/tenant form as applicable.
The account shall be in the name of the owner and may be activated or terminated only
upon written notice by the owner and payment for services provided.
Owners of a single water-metered building shall be the bill payer responsible for all
charges to the account.
Billing for utility services shall commence for each service at the date of connection of
each service to the property or the date of the closing of sale for a property.
Billing for mandated wastewater service, as directed by the Health District local Health
Official or the Director regardless of connection, shall commence sixty (60) days following
written notice by the Health District local Health Official or the date of connection, whichever
shall occur first.
All utility billing forms will be available on the City of Bremerton website. Electronic
signatures will be accepted for all utility billing online application submittals.
When it benefits the utility to do so and at the discretion of the Director of Financial
and Administrative Services, or designee, a credit may be authorized for a utility customer not
to exceed fifty dollars ($50.00) per year per account. A credit in excess of this amount requires
City Council approval by motion or resolution.
Page 19 of 19
SECTION 21. Chapter 15.08 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
"Appeals" is hereby amended to read as follows:
Chapter 15.08
APPEALS
Sections:
15.08.010 APPEALS - DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES.
15.08.020 APPEAL - ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING EXAMINER.
15.08.010 APPEALS - DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES.
A property owner, tenant or developer ("customer") shall have the right to appeal
matters dealing with accounting, billing and service termination.
In the case of termination of service, an appeal shall be filed in writing with the
Department of Financial and Administrative Services within fourteen (14) days of the notice of
termination. All other complaints shall be filed within thirty (30) days of notice of the action
appealed.
The City shall be required to respond in writing to the appellant within thirty (30) days
affirming or reversing its decision or requesting additional information for adjudication of the
complaint.
15.08.020 APPEAL - ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING EXAMINER.
Any customer aggrieved by the City’s decision after a written complaint has been
denied by the City under BMC 15.08.010 may, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the
date that the City’s decision was mailed to the customer, appeal such denial or revocation by
filing a written notice of appeal setting forth the grounds therefor with the Administrative
Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC. A filing fee as set forth in Chapter 3.01
BMC shall be submitted with the appeal, which filing fee is required to process the appeal. The
hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures for hearing contested cases set
out in Chapter 2.13 BMC. After the hearing thereon, the Administrative Hearing Examiner
shall, after appropriate findings of fact and conclusions of law, affirm, modify, or overrule the
City’s decision, and may impose any terms thereupon.
The decision of the Administrative Hearing Examiner shall be final. The customer
and/or the City may seek review of the decision by the superior court of Washington in and for
Kitsap County within twenty-one (21) calendar days from the date of the decision.
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Ordinance to correct legislative markup
errors in Ordinance No. 5506
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: DCD
Presenter: G. Jackson, Pln Mgr.
Phone: (360) 473-5289
SUMMARY: On December 18th, 2024 the City Council held a public hearing and adopted Ordinance
# 5506 related to BMC Title 20 permit procedures. Since that time clerical errors have been identified
in the legislative markup of the adopted ordinance. The attached ordinance highlights areas where
discrepancies have been identified and corrects these clerical errors. Staff seeks permission from
Council to work with the City Attorney on a corrective Ordinance to be presented for public hearing at
the February 5th 2025 City Council meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Ordinance
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount): None.
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☐ General Business ☐ Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to pass Ordinance No. _____ to correct clerical errors found in Ordinance No. 5506 related to
BMC Title 20 permit procedures.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 04/19/2024
B8
1
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
ORDINANCE NO. ________
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of the City of
Bremerton, Washington, amending the Bremerton Municipal Code
Title 20 related to project permit procedures and timelines.
WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature passed Senate Bill 5290 (SB 5290)
in 2023 requiring municipalities to report on their permit processing timelines for 2024,
streamline the permit review process, and conform to new timelines, or adopt an ordinance
establishing longer timelines; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8 of SB 5290, noncompliance with the permit
review timelines may require the return of a portion of permitting fees unless certain provisions
are adopted to provide prompt review; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton complies with Section 8 of SB 5290,
subsections 1(f), (g), and (h) by (i) only requiring public hearings for permit applications that are
required to have a public hearing by statute, (ii) making presubmittal application conferences
optional rather than a requirement of permit application submittal, and (iii) making housing types
an outright permitted use in all zones where the housing type is permitted; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bremerton (“City”) has established a procedure for
amending the Zoning Code in Title 20.18.020(d) of the Bremerton Municipal Code (“BMC”),
which requires amendments to the Zoning Code to be both consistent with the goals and policies
of the Comprehensive Plan and to be consistent with other applicable rules and regulations; and
WHEREAS, these amendments are consistent with the City’s Comprehensive
Plan, County Wide Planning Policies, the State Growth Management Act, and other applicable
regulations and ordinances; and
WHEREAS, on October 21, 2024 the Planning Commission conducted a
workshop on the proposed Zoning Code amendments; and
WHEREAS, on November 8, 2024 the public was notified by a legal
advertisement in the Kitsap Sun of the opportunity to make comment and participate in the
public hearing held by the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2024 proposed Zoning Code amendments were
circulated to Department of Commerce and the State Agencies for the requisite review and
comment period; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2024 for Zoning Code amendments, a State
Environmental Policy Act (“SEPA”) Determination of Nonsignificance (“DNS”) was issued for
the proposed action with a comment period, and no appeals were filed; and
2
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2024 the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing on the Zoning Code amendments and formulated a recommendation to forward the
amendments for City Council consideration; and
WHEREAS, on December 5, 2024 the public was notified by a legal
advertisement in the Kitsap Sun of the opportunity to make comment and participate in the
public hearing on December 18, 2024 by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, on December 18, 2024, the City Council conducted a public hearing
and considered all testimony prior to their decision; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings and Recitals Incorporated. The findings and recitals set
forth above are hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. Planning Commission Findings. The findings and conclusions
adopted by the Planning Commission attached hereto as Exhibit A are adopted and incorporated
as if set forth herein in full.
SECTION 3. Section 20.02 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled “Project
Permits” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.02.010 PURPOSE AND INTENT.
(a) Fundamental land use planning choices made in adopted Comprehensive Plans and
development regulations shall serve as the foundation for project review. This chapter establishes
how the City of Bremerton will process applications for project permits.
(b) These procedures provide for an effective processing and review of permits consistent with
Chapter 36.70B RCW. This chapter is applied in conjunction with Chapter 2.13 BMC
(Administrative Hearing Examiner); Chapter 17.04 BMC (City Building Code);
Chapter 20.04 BMC (State Environmental Policy Act); Chapter 20.12 BMC (Land Division);
BMC Title 20, Division III; the Bremerton Shoreline Master Program; Chapter 20.14 BMC
(Critical Areas); and other applicable codes making reference to this chapter. (Ord. 5301 §3
(Exh. B) (part), 2016: Ord. 5301 §3 (Exh. B) (part), 2016: Ord. 5091 §2 (part), 2009: Ord. 4938
§3 (part), 2005)
20.02.020 DEFINITIONS.
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this
chapter.
"City" means the City of Bremerton.
3
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
"Closed-record appeal" means an administrative appeal on the record on a project permit
application following an open-record hearing with no or limited new evidence or information
allowed to be submitted and only appeal argument allowed.
"Days" means calendar days.
"Department" means Department of Community Development.
"Director" means the Director of the Department of Community Development of the City of
Bremerton or his/her designee.
"Hearing body" means the City Council, Hearing Examiner or any other body designated by the
City Council to preside over an open-record hearing or closed-record appeal.
"Hearing examiner" means the Administrative Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC.
"Open-record appeal hearing" means an open-record hearing held on an appeal when no open-
record predecision hearing has been held on the project permit application.
"Open-record hearing" means a hearing that creates the City’s record through testimony and
submission of evidence and information, under procedures prescribed by the City by ordinance
or resolution. An open-record hearing held prior to the City’s decision shall be known as an
"open-record predecision hearing."
"Parties of record" means:
(1) The applicant;
(2) The property tax payer as identified by the records available from the Kitsap County
Assessor’s Office;
(3) Any person who testified at the open-record public hearing on the application; and/or
(4) Any person who submitted written comments during administrative review public
comment period or has submitted written comments concerning the application at the open-
record public hearing (excluding persons who have only signed petitions or mechanically
produced form letters).
"Project permit" or "project permit application" means any land use or environmental permit or
license required from the City of Bremerton for a project action, including but not limited to
building permits, site development permits, land use preparation permits, subdivisions, binding
site plans, planned unit developments, conditional uses, shoreline substantial development
permits, development plan review, site-specific rezones authorized by the Comprehensive Plan,
but excluding adoption or amendment of the Comprehensive Plan and development regulations,
zoning of newly annexed land, area-wide rezones, and zoning map amendments except as
otherwise specifically included in this subsection.
"Public meeting" means an informal meeting, hearing, workshop, or other public gathering of
persons to obtain comments from the public or other agencies on a proposed project permit prior
to the City’s decision. A public meeting may include, but is not limited to, a design review
meeting, a special committee meeting, such as the short subdivision committee, or a scoping
meeting on a draft environmental impact statement. A public meeting does not include an open-
record hearing. The proceedings at a public meeting may be recorded and a report or
recommendation may be included in the City’s project permit application file.
4
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
"SEPA" means the State Environmental Policy Act and includes the provisions of
Chapter 43.21C RCW, Chapter 197-11 WAC and Chapter 20.04 BMC.
"Stand alone nonproject SEPA" means a nonexempt proposal involving a decision on policies,
plans, or programs that requires SEPA review and that is not associated with the Comprehensive
Plan, development regulations, or area-wide rezones subject to Chapter 20.10 BMC,
Chapter 20.18 BMC, and BMC 20.58.050, respectively.
20.02.030 GENERAL PROVISIONS.
(a) General Exemptions. The following permits or approvals are exempt from the procedures
set forth in this chapter:
(1) Landmark designations;
(2) Street vacations;
(3) Right-of-way/street use permits;
(4) Permits or approvals relating to the use of public areas or facilities;
(5) Permits or approvals involving the location or development of essential public facilities
or utilities;
(6) Bremerton Fire Department permits;
(76) Project permits not listed in this chapter which are categorically exempt from SEPA;
(87) Legislative actions such as the adoption of or amendments to the Comprehensive Plan,
subarea plans, area-wide map amendments, and development regulations. Such legislative
actions are addressed in Chapters 20.10 and 20.18 BMC and BMC 20.58.050.
(b) Applicable Procedures. The Director shall determine the proper procedure for the
processing of each project permit application pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. Disputes
shall be resolved in favor of the higher category. Type I is considered the lowest and Type IV is
the highest.
(c) Standard Consistency. The City reviews proposals for consistency to applicable
development regulations and the Comprehensive Plan. This determination includes consideration
of the following:
(1) The type of land use permitted, including uses that may be permitted under certain
circumstances, provided the criteria for their approval is satisfied;
(2) The density of development allowed such as units per acre or other measures of density;
(3) Availability and adequacy of infrastructure, which includes public facilities and services
identified in the Comprehensive Plan; and
(4) Characteristics of the development such as development design standards.
(d) Conflict with Other Regulations. When any provisions of this chapter conflict with
provisions of other City regulations, ordinances or resolutions, the more restrictive shall apply.
(e) Severability. If any part or provision of this chapter or the application of these regulations to
any person or circumstances is adjudged invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the
judgment shall be confined in its operations to the part, provision, or application directly
5
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
involved in the controversy in which the judgment shall be rendered and it shall not affect or
impair the validity of the remainder of these regulations or the application of them to other
persons or circumstances.
(f) General Notice Requirements. The available records of the Kitsap County Assessor’s Office
shall be used to determine the property taxpayer of record. All notices shall be deemed to have
been provided or received on the date the notice is deposited in the mail or personally delivered,
whichever occurs first. Failure to provide the public notice as described in this chapter shall not
be grounds for invalidation of a decision on a permit.
(g) Optional Public Notice. In addition to required public notice, the City may provide notice to
other individuals or organizations interested or possibly affected by the proposal. Failure to
provide optional public notice shall not be grounds for invalidation of a decision on a permit.
(h) Application Submittals. The City’s online portal acts as the application for project permits.
Required application content is provided in the City’s handouts/forms which are used to
supplement Municipal Code. Submittal requirements for a complete application are provided in
the forms and handouts which identify the types of reports, documents, and information
necessary.
20.02.040 PROJECT PERMIT PROCESSING PROCEDURES.
Project permit applications are categorized as Type I, Type II, Type III or Type IV project
permits. Permit processing procedures may include determination of completeness, notice of
application, notice of public hearing and notice of decision. Applicable procedures for the
processing of permits are pursuant to the following provisions:
(a) Type I Project Permits. These are administrative decisions by the Director who may
approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. They include permits categorically
exempt from SEPA review or that have had SEPA review previously completed in connection
with another application or permit. Type I project permit processing procedures are set forth in
Table 040. Examples of Type I permits include administrative code interpretations,
building/construction/demolition permits (SEPA exempt), final short subdivisions, permit
revocations, etc.
(b) Type II Project Permit. These are administrative decisions by the Director with limited
public notice. The Director has the authority to approve, conditionally approve or deny the
application. Type II project permit processing procedures are set forth in Table 040. Examples of
Type II permits include administrative conditional use permits, short plats/binding site plans, site
plan review (requiring SEPA), building/construction/demolition permits (requiring SEPA), stand
alone nonproject SEPA, etc.
(c) Type III Project Permit. These are Hearing Examiner decisions. The Hearing Examiner may
approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application. Type III project permit processing
procedures are set forth in Table 040. Examples of Type III permits include nonadministrative
conditional use permits, preliminary formal subdivisions, variances, etc.
(d) Type IV Project Permit. These are decisions by the City Council after a closed-record
hearing. The City Council may approve, conditionally approve, modify and approve or deny the
application. Type IV project permit processing procedures are set forth in Table 040. Examples
of Type IV permits include site-specific rezones, development agreements, vacation of
subdivisions, etc.
6
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(e) Table 040 Permit Processing Procedures.
Application Type
Determination
of
Completeness
Notice of
Application
Notice
of
Hearing
Notice
of
Decision
Type I Permit No No No No
Type II Permit Yes Yes No Yes
Type III Permit Yes Yes Yes Yes
Type IV Permit Yes Yes Yes Yes
Development
Agreement No No Yes Yes
Final
Subdivision1 No No No No
Site Specific
Rezone2 Yes Yes Yes Yes
Stand Alone
Nonproject SEPA No No No No
1 The Hearing Examiner holds an open-record hearing for preliminary approval. The
Director makes the final administrative decision.
2 The Hearing Examiner holds an open-record hearing. The City Council holds a closed-
record hearing for final approval.
20.02.050 PRESUBMITTAL APPLICATION CONFERENCE.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of the pre-application conference is to acquaint the applicant with the
review procedures and applicable Bremerton Municipal Code provisions to the proposal. Type II,
III and IV permits require a presubmittal application conference prior to submitting an
application. Anyone choosing the consolidated permit process set forth in BMC 20.02.060 also
requires a presubmittal application conference. Presubmittal application meetings are
encouraged; Only one (1) a single meeting is required may be scheduled for all project permit
applications related to the same project action.
(b) Waiver. The Director may waive the requirement for a presubmittal application conference
when a proposal is determined not to be of a size and complexity to require a detailed analysis.
(cb) Submission. Presubmittal application conferences may be held at any time before an
application is submitted. A completed form and related information in sufficient number of
copies as determined by the Director are required. The information does not need to meet the
submission requirement set forth in BMC 20.02.060.
7
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(dc) Timeline. The City shall hold the presubmittal application conference within thirty (30)
days of the receipt of a completed request, unless the applicant agrees to an extension of this time
in writing.
(ed) Nonbinding. The presubmittal 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. Failure to provide all pertinent information may prevent the City from
identifying all of the issues or providing the most effective presubmittal application conference.
(e) Lapse of Time. If a time lapse of more than one (1) year occurs between a presubmittal
application conference and the submission for permits, or if the Director determines the scope of
the project has changed significantly from the presubmittal application conference, a new
conference may be required.
20.02.060 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Application Contents. An application submitted to the Department shall be in a manner
determined by the Director. Unless specified otherwise, an application shall at least include the
following:
(1) A completed application form;
(2) A legal description of the property and associated tax account number(s);
(3) A vicinity map showing the location of the property including surrounding major
streets, shorelines and other reference points;
(4) A site plan;
(5) When required, mailing labels containing the names and addresses of all owners of
record of parcels within the notification radius;
(6) When required, SEPA checklist and/or other environmental documentation;
(7) Additional information required by the Director to support a decision on the
application(s), such as Notice to Title, easements, or other legal documents to verify
ownership;
(8) The application fee(s) for the permit(s) requested as set forth in Chapter 3.01 BMC or
by other applicable rule or regulation.
20.02.070 VESTING.
A project permit application shall vest in the land use regulations in effect on the land at the time
of submission of a completed project permit application as defined herein and all application fees
are paid.
20.02.080 OPTIONAL CONSOLIDATED PERMITTING PROCESS.
(a) An application which involves two (2) or more permits or procedures may have the
processes consolidated under the highest project permit classification and procedures. A request
for concurrent review combining different application types will calculate review times based on
the longest review time of all concurrent applications. The applicant shall request if they want
their permit processes consolidated or if they want each permit processed individually.
8
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(b) If a project involving two (2) or more permits has the permits processed individually, the
highest project permit classification and procedures shall be finalized before subsequent permits
can be issued. The Director may waive this requirement for permits not dependent on the higher
classification of permit for their justification or implementation.
(c) If applicable, a single open-record hearing and no more than one (1) closed-record appeal
shall be provided on a consolidated review process. The consolidated process may combine an
open-record hearing on one (1) or more permits with an open-record appeal hearing on the other
permits.
20.02.090 DETERMINATION OF COMPLETENESS.
When review procedures require a determination of completeness, the following shall apply:
(a) Determination. Within twenty-eight (28) days of accepting the application, the Department
shall provide a written determination to the applicant, stating that:
(1) The application is complete; or
(2) The submission requirements have not been met, and outlining application is
incomplete and what is necessary to make the application complete.
To the extent known, the City shall identify other agencies of local, state or federal
governments that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the application.
(b) Failure to Notify. Failure to provide a written determination within the required time shall
automatically deem the application complete.
(c) Processing. A complete application meets the submission requirements set forth in
BMC 20.02.060 and is sufficient for continued processing. The determination of completeness
shall not preclude the City from requesting additional information or studies either at the time of
the notice or subsequently if new information is required or substantial changes in the proposed
action occur. Should additional information be requested, the applicant shall have sixty (60)
ninety (90) days from the date notified to submit the requested materials. Should the materials
not be submitted within the time limits, the application shall lapse expire and a new application
will be required.
(d) Incomplete Application. An incomplete application shall have sixty (60) ninety (90) days
from the date of the written determination in subsection (a)(2) of this section for the necessary
information to be submitted. If the applicant either refuses in writing or does not submit the
required information within the time limits, the application shall lapse expire and a new
application will be required.
(e) Review of Additional Information. When additional information for an incomplete
application is received, the City shall notify the applicant within fourteen (14) days of receipt of
the additional information whether the application is complete or what additional information is
necessary.
(f) Review Timeline. Following the date an application is determined complete, the date shall
be noted and the one hundred twenty (120) day official review period to render a decision shall
begin. The review periods for project permits are set forth in Table 090.
(g) Table 090 Permit Review Timelines.
9
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
Application Type Decision Timeline
Projects Not Requiring Public Notice Within 65 Days after Determination of
Completeness
Projects Requiring Public Notice Within 100 Days after Determination of
Completeness
Projects Requiring Public Notice and a
Hearing
Within 170 Days after Determination of
Completeness
20.02.100 NOTICE OF APPLICATION.
When review procedures require a notice of application, the following shall apply:
(a) Timeline. The notice shall be provided within fourteen (14) days after the determination of
completeness is issued.
(b) Content. The notice of application shall include the following:
(1) The file number assigned;
(2) The date of application, date of the notice of completeness, and the date of the notice of
application;
(3) A description of the proposed project action and a list of permits included with the
application and, if applicable, a list of requested studies;
(4) Identification of known permits not included with the application;
(5) Identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposal;
(6) The location where the application and any studies can be reviewed;
(7) A statement of the public comment period and which shall not be less than fourteen (14)
or more than thirty (30) days;
(8) A statement of the rights of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of
and participate in any hearings, request a copy of the decision and any appeal rights;
(9) Any other information determined appropriate by the City.
(c) Legal Notice. Notice shall be provided in the following manner as applicable:
(1) Mail. The notice shall be sent by email, first class or higher mail to the following:
(i) The applicant;
(ii) Affected City departments;
(iii) State, federal and local agencies with jurisdiction;
(iv) For Type III permits, mailed notice shall also be sent to all property owners of real
property (as shown by the records of the Kitsap County Assessor’s Office) within three
hundred (300) feet of the subject property. Where any portion of a property abutting the
subject property is owned, controlled, or under the option of purchase by the applicant,
10
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
all property owners within a three hundred (300) foot radius of the total ownership
interest shall be notified; and
(v) Any person who requests such notice in writing to the Department.
(2) Posting of the Property. Notice shall be posted according to the following:
(i) At least one (1) location on or adjacent to the subject property and that shall be
clearly visible and legible from an adjacent street or public area;
(ii) The Director shall determine the specifications to the construction and installation
of the notice boards.
(3) Publishing Notice. A published notice in the City’s official newspaper of general
circulation within the City boundaries is required. The content shall include the following:
(i) Project location;
(ii) Project description;
(iii) Type of permit(s) required;
(iv) Comment period and dates;
(v) Location where the complete application may be viewed.
(d) Integration of Notices. The City will integrate the notice of application with SEPA review
whenever possible. Notification for a notice of application should be combined with the
notification for threshold determination and the scoping for a determination of significance
whenever possible.
(e) Issuance of Decisions. Except for a threshold determination, the City may not issue a
decision or a recommendation on a permit until the expiration of the public comment period.
(f) Public Comments. Comments shall be as specific as possible. Comments shall be received
by the last day of the comment period specified in the notice. If no comments are received by the
date specified in the notice from an affected City department or agency with jurisdiction, which
notification was sent to, then it is presumed that the department or agency has no comments.
20.02.110 NOTICE OF HEARING.
When review procedures require a notice of hearing, the following shall apply:
(a) Notice Integration. A notice of hearing is required for public hearings. A notice of hearing
may be integrated with the notice of application.
(b) Notice Content. A written notice of hearing shall contain the following information:
(1) The name of the applicant or designated contact;
(2) A description of the affected property (not including any legal description);
(3) Project summary/description of each project permit application;
(4) The application/project file number;
(5) The date, time and place of the hearing;
(6) A statement that all interested persons may appear and provide testimony;
11
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(7) A statement where information may be examined or obtained and the staff contact and
phone number;
(8) A statement how written testimony or comments may be submitted;
(9) The SEPA threshold determination along with any appropriate statement regarding any
shared or divided lead agency status and phased review, and stating the end of any final
comment period;
(10) The deadline (date, time and place) for submitting a SEPA appeal;
(11) A statement regarding any administrative appeal process including SEPA appeal.
(c) Project Permit Notification. Notification for a hearing on a project permit shall be provided
in the following manner as applicable:
(1) Mail. The notice shall be sent by email, first class mail or higher to the following:
(i) The applicant;
(ii) All property owners of real property (as shown by the records of the Kitsap County
Assessor’s Office) within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property. Where any
portion of a property abutting the subject property is owned, controlled, or under the
option of purchase by the applicant, all property owners within a three hundred (300) foot
radius of the total ownership interest shall be notified;
(iii) Any person providing a written request to the Department.
(2) Preliminary Plat. When adjacent to the right-of-way of a state highway, or within two
(2) miles of the boundary of a state or municipal airport, mailed notice shall be given to the
Secretary of Transportation, who has fifteen (15) days to respond.
(3) Posting of the Property. The notice shall be posted in the same manner and location(s)
as the notice of application set forth in BMC 20.02.100(c)(2).
(4) Publishing Notice. A published legal notice in the City’s official newspaper of general
circulation within the City boundaries is required. The content of the published notice shall
include the following information:
(i) Project location;
(ii) Project description;
(iii) Type of permit(s) required;
(iv) Comment period and dates;
(v) Location where the complete application may be viewed.
(d) Notice Deadlines. Notice shall be given at least ten (10) days before the hearing date
except:
(1) Shoreline permits pursuant to WAC 173-27-110(3) shall be given at least fifteen (15)
days.
(2) An integrated notice of hearing and notice of application shall be given at least fifteen
(15) days.
12
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(3) An integrated notice of hearing and notice of a SEPA threshold determination shall be
given at least fifteen (15) days.
(e) Continuation of Hearing. Continued hearings do not require additional notices of hearing.
(f) Appeal Notification. Notification for a hearing on an open-record or closed-record appeal
shall be provided in the following manner:
(1) Mail. The notice shall be sent by email, first class mail or higher to the following:
(i) The applicant/appellant;
(ii) Parties of record;
(iii) Affected agencies;
(iv) Parties requesting notice; and
(v) Other persons whom the Department believes may be affected by the action.
(g) Additional Procedures. In addition to the procedures contained in this chapter, the
Department may develop general procedures for notification, including mailing packets and
the format of the notice and an affidavit of posting/mailing form to be filled out by the party
doing notice.
20.02.120 JOINT PUBLIC HEARING.
A hearing on a project permit application may be combined with any other hearing on the action
held by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency pursuant to RCW 36.70B.110 as
currently enacted or hereinafter amended.
20.02.130 NOTICE OF DECISION.
The Director, the Hearing Examiner or the City Council issues a decision at the conclusion of
applicable project permit review. The notice of decision may be included as part of the decision
or project permit.
(a) The City shall provide a notice of decision. The notice shall include a statement of any
threshold determination made under SEPA and the procedures for appeal if a consolidated notice
was not given under BMC 20.02.110(d)(3).
(1) A decision of approval or denial may be issued if information requested by the City is
not provided after a third request for corrections does not result in the applicant providing
needed revised materials. Prior to decisions being issued per BMC 20.02.130(a)(1), the City
shall notify the applicant within 14 days of issuing a decision to attempt to resolve
outstanding issues. The City may consider a written requests not to issue a decision per this
section when the applicant and City mutually agree to alternative permit review timelines per
BMC 20.02.090(f).
(b) Notification. Notification shall be provided in the following manner as applicable:
(1) Mail. The notice shall be sent by email, first class mail or higher to the following:
(i) The applicant;
13
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(ii) Any person who, prior to the rendering of the decision, requested notice of the
decision in writing to the Department, or who submitted substantive comments on the
application; and
(iii) Kitsap County Assessor’s Office.
(c) Notice Contents. The notice may include a copy of the report of decision on the project
permit application; and shall include, when available, the SEPA threshold determination, the
permit decision, the conditions of approval or where they may be viewed by the public, and the
general procedures and time limits to file an appeal.
(d) Change of Valuation. The notice shall state that affected property owners may request a
change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
(e) Timelines. The notice shall be issued within one hundred twenty (120) days after the City
notifies the applicant that the application is complete pursuant to BMC 20.02.090 the time limit
prescribed in 20.02.090(f), except as follows:
(1) The Director makes written findings that a specified amount of additional time is
needed for processing the application; or
(2) A permit or approval involving the location or development of important public
facilities or utilities, or related to the use of public areas or facilities, for public purposes may
be excluded from the one hundred twenty (120) day time limit prescribed in 20.02.090(f)
upon a determination of the Director that special circumstances warrant a longer process.
(3) A permit or approval where coordination with a government agency is sought by the
City involving potential impacts to cultural resources.
(f) Extension of Timelines. If the City is unable to issue its final decision on a project permit
application within the time limits provided for in this chapter, it shall provide written notice of
this fact to the parties of record. The notice shall include a statement of reasons why the time
limits were not met, and an estimated date for issuance of the notice of decision.
(g) Timeline Exclusion. The one hundred twenty (120) day review time limits in 20.02.090(f)
shall exclude any of the following:
(1) Any period an applicant takes to provide additional information, perform studies or
provide corrected plans requested by the city;
(2) Any period where the City determines that submitted information is insufficient or
incorrect, and has requested the applicant provide the necessary information.
(3) Any period an environmental impact statement (EIS) is being prepared including
scoping and preparing the draft and final EIS.
(4) Any period for administrative appeals and any period for reconsideration of decisions of
the Hearing Examiner made on project permit applications. The period for consideration and
decision on appeals shall not exceed:
(i) Ninety (90) days for an open-record appeal hearing; or
(ii) Sixty (60) days for a closed-record appeal.
(iii) The parties may agree to extend these periods.
14
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(5) Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the City.
(6) All excluded periods are calculated from the date the City notifies the applicant to when
the information satisfies the City’s requirement.
(7) The City may consider an applicant request to temporarily suspend review of an
application until the time that the applicant notifies the city, in writing, that they would like to
resume review of the application;
(8) Any period after an administrative appeal is filed until the administrative appeal is
resolved and any additional time period provided by the administrative appeal has expired;
provided, that the city may set conditions on the temporary suspension of a permit
application.
(79) When the applicant submits the requested information, the City shall have fourteen
(14) days to determine if it is satisfactory. If the information is not satisfactory, but the City
fails to notify the applicant within the time limit, the information shall be deemed
satisfactory.
(810) The time limits established in this section do not apply if a project permit application:
(i) Requires an Is not a Project Permit Application (such as amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan or a development regulation); or
(ii) Requires approval of the location of an essential public facility as provided in
RCW 36.70A.200; or
(iii) Is substantially revised by the applicant, in which case the period shall start from
the date at which the revised project application is determined to be complete.
(h) Liability. The City is not liable for damages due to the City’s failure to make a final
decision within the time limits established in this chapter.
20.02.140 APPEALS.
(a) General.
(1) Those land use and development decisions that are subject to appeal shall become final
unless an appeal is filed within the designated time to file an appeal.
(2) The appellant shall bear the burden of proving the administrative decision was not
supported by substantial evidence.
(3) Appeal of Type I or Type II project permit final decisions shall be to the Hearing
Examiner. Appeals shall be filed within fourteen (14) days following the issuance of the
notice of decision. A decision involving a SEPA determination of nonsignificance which
required public comments shall have the appeal period extended an additional seven (7) days.
(4) Administrative appeal of a SEPA threshold determination on project permits is to the
Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 20.04 BMC and subsection (a)(3) of this section. The
appeal shall consolidate any allowed appeals of procedural and substantive determinations
under SEPA with a hearing or appeal on the underlying governmental action in a single
simultaneous hearing before the Hearing Examiner consistent with Chapter 36.70B RCW,
WAC 197-11 -680, this chapter and Chapter 20.04 BMC.
15
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(5) Appeal of Type III or Type IV project permit final decisions shall be to Kitsap County
Superior Court pursuant to Chapter 36.70C RCW. Appeals shall be filed within twenty-one
(21) days following the issuance of the notice of decision.
(6) Final decision relating to the Bremerton Shoreline Master Program may be appealed as
follows:
(i) Director decisions and Type II shoreline permits may be appealed to the Hearing
Examiner pursuant to subsection (a)(3) of this section or may be appealed directly to the
Shoreline Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58.180.
(ii) Hearing Examiner decisions may be appealed to the Shoreline Hearings Board by
filing a petition for review within twenty-one (21) days of the date of filing pursuant to
RCW 90.58.140(6).
(b) Standing to Appeal. Only parties of record with standing may initiate an appeal. Standing
constitutes the following:
(1) For Type I project permits, the applicant and the owner of property to which the permit
decision is directed have standing.
(2) For project permits not Type I, the following have standing:
(i) Applicant;
(ii) Property owner to which the permit decision is directed;
(iii) Anyone who participates in the public hearing; or
(iv) Anyone who submits written comments in response to a legal notice within the
required time limits.
(c) Filing an Appeal. Administrative appeals are filed by submitting a form provided by the
Department. The appeal must be received by 5:00 p.m. on the last day of the appeal period.
Appeals may be mailed, faxed or delivered to the Department.
(d) Timing of Decisions.
(1) An open-record appeal shall be decided within ninety (90) days from the date the
complete appeal was filed.
(2) Should an occasion arise that would require a closed-record appeal hearing, such an
appeal shall be decided within sixty (60) days.
(e) Computation of Time. For purposes of computing the time for filing an appeal, the day the
decision is rendered shall not be included. The last day of the appeal period shall be included
unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, a day designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by the City’s ordinances as
a legal holiday; then it also is excluded and the filing must be completed on the next business
day.
(f) Content of Appeal. An administrative appeal shall not be accepted unless it is written,
accompanied by the required appeal fee, and contains at least the following information:
(1) Appellant’s name, address and phone number;
(2) Appellant’s statement describing his or her standing, as a party of record, to appeal;
16
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(3) Identification of the application which is the subject of the appeal;
(4) Statement of grounds for appeal and the facts upon which the appeal is based;
(5) Statement of the relief sought, including the specific nature and extent; and
(6) A statement that the appellant has read the appeal and believes the contents to be true,
followed by the appellant’s signature.
(g) Effect. The timely filing of an administrative appeal shall stay the effective date of the
decision until the appeal is either decided or withdrawn.
(h) Notice of Appeal. The Director shall provide public notice of the appeal as provided in
BMC 20.02.110(f).
20.02.150 DESIGN REVIEW.
Buildings that are proposed for construction in areas having adopted design guidelines are
subject to review and recommendation by the Design Review Board (Board). For any
development activity that requires Board review, the applicant must comply with the provisions
of this section before a building permit can be approved, as follows:
(a) Public Meetings. All meetings of the Board shall be open to the public but are not subject to
the requirements of the Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 42.30 RCW.
(b) Conceptual Design Conference. Before submitting a building permit application, the
applicant shall attend a conceptual design conference with the Board. The conference will be
scheduled by the Director to occur within thirty (30) days of written request submittal of a
complete application by the applicant. The purpose of this conference is to provide an
opportunity for the applicant to discuss the project concept with the Board in the early stages of
the project development and:
(1) To review preliminary sketches of the design proposal presented by the applicant;
(2) To discuss how the design guidelines pertain to the proposed development;
(3) For the Design Review Board to designate which design guidelines apply to the
proposed development based primarily on the location and nature of the proposed
development; and
(4) Other application materials the applicant will need to submit with the design review
application.
(c) Application. Following the conceptual design conference, the applicant may then submit a
building permit application to the Department. The application shall include all documents and
exhibits required for the application, as well as all materials required as a result of the conceptual
design conference.
(dc) Public Notice. On determination of a complete application for a building permit requiring
design review, the Director shall schedule a design response conference with the Board to occur
within sixty (60) calendar days. The Director shall provide public notice of the Conceptual
Design Review conference per the requirements of BMC 20.02.100. All interested parties from
the Conceptual Design Review conference shall receive notice of the Design Response
Conference.
17
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(ed) Design Response Conference. The design response stage allows the Board to review the
design plans and provide direction to the applicant on issues to be resolved for final approval.
The applicant shall present the proposed project and demonstrate its consistency with the design
guidelines as discussed in the conceptual design conference to the Board. The Board will
consider the information presented and make a formal recommendation to the Director for
project approval, approval with conditions, or denial. The Board may continue the conference if
necessary to gather additional information necessary for its recommendation. If the conference is
continued to a specific date, no further public notice is required; otherwise notice of continuance
shall be mailed to all parties participating in the design response conference. The design response
conference may be waived provided:
(1) The Design Review Board provides a unanimous recommendation of approval and
makes findings that the response conference is not necessary; and
(2) The Director finds that more information is not required for the decision after the
Design Review Board makes their unanimous recommendation.
(fe) Approval. Design Review approval is a Director decision, on Approval of a building
permit that is subject to Board review is a Type II Director decision; however, the Board’s
recommendation shall hold substantial weight. After reviewing the Board recommendation, the
Director may grant, deny or conditionally approve an application for the proposed development.
Any deviation from the Board’s recommendation shall be documented in the Director’s findings
and conclusions. The decision of the Director may be appealed per the provisions of
BMC 20.02.140.
20.02.160 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES.
(a) The City may enter into a development agreement with a person having ownership or
control of real property within its jurisdiction or outside its boundaries as part of a proposed
annexation or a service agreement. A development agreement sets forth the development
standards and other provisions that shall apply to and govern and vest the development, use, and
mitigation of the development of the real property for the duration specified in the agreement.
(b) A determination of completeness, notice of hearing and a notice of decision are required
pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. The one hundred twenty (120) day time limit for the
notice of decision shall not apply to a development agreement. Review timelines per BMC
20.02.090(h) do not apply to Development Agreements as they require legislative action.
(c) When a request for a development agreement is consolidated with a Type III or IV project
permit, the public hearing shall be consolidated with the open-record hearing on the permit
before the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner shall make a recommendation to the City
Council on the development agreement and approval of the project permit shall be conditioned
on City Council approval of the development permit.
(d) The City Council may approve a development agreement by ordinance or resolution only.
20.02.170 PLANNED ACTIONS.
A "planned action" is defined in WAC 197-11 -164 as one (1) or more types of project action that
has had significant environmental impacts adequately addressed in an environmental impact
statement (EIS) prepared in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan, subarea plan, fully
18
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned development or a phased
project.
(a) A project action addressed in a planned action does not require an environmental checklist
or threshold determination, but may require the checklist for review to mitigate environmental
impacts through the site plan review process.
(b) To qualify, a project action shall:
(1) Be subsequent to or implementing projects in a Comprehensive Plan, subarea plan, fully
contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned development or a phased
project;
(2) Be located within the City’s adopted urban growth areas;
(3) Be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
(4) Not be an essential public facility, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200.
(c) The City Council shall designate and approve by ordinance a planned action. The
ordinance:
(1) Shall describe the type(s) of project action being designated as a planned action;
(2) Shall describe how the planned action meets the criteria in subsection (b) of this
section, including specific references to the EIS;
(3) Shall include findings that the environmental impacts have been identified and
adequately addressed in the EIS, subject to project review under WAC 197-11 -172;
(4) Should identify any specific mitigation measures other than applicable development
regulations that must be applied to a project for it to qualify as a planned action.
(d) The planned action may be limited to certain types of development, to specific geographical
areas of the City, and/or a time period identified in the EIS, plan, ordinance or resolution.
(e) Review of a project proposed as a planned action is intended to be simpler and more
focused than for other projects. Review of the project shall include:
(1) Verification that it meets the description and implements any applicable conditions or
mitigation measures identified in the designating ordinance or resolution;
(2) Verification that the proposed significant adverse environmental impacts of the project
have been adequately addressed in the EIS.
(f) Nothing in this section limits the City from using applicable law to place conditions on the
project in order to mitigate nonsignificant impacts through normal project review and permitting
processes.
20.02.180 NOTIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT.
Informational signage is required to be posted on the site for proposals of five (5) or more
residential units, all nonresidential construction projects greater than 120 square feet, and on all
sites that require State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review in accordance with the
following standards:
19
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(a) The City shall provide the sign to the applicant, along with instructions for posting the
sign. The sign shall be installed per instructions provided by City staff. At a minimum, the sign
will include permit number(s), description of intended use, general duration of construction, a
site plan, elevations, and contact information.
(b) Posting of the sign is the applicant’s responsibility. Proof of posting, such as a photo,
must be provided to City staff. Signs shall be posted concurrently with review of development
permits, after staff determines adequate information is available. Signs shall be removed upon
final inspection.
SECTION 4. Section 20.46.070 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Adaptive Reuse of Commercial Buildings” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.46.070 ADAPTIVE REUSE OF COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.
(a) Approval of an administrative Type II conditional use permit (CUP) pursuant to
BMC 20.58.020 is required when an adaptive reuse is for a legally established commercial
building located within a residential zone. However, the notice of application shall follow
BMC 20.02.100(c)(1)(iv) with notification of property owners within three hundred (300) feet.
The Director may require a nonadministrative CUP whenever the use has a significant impact
beyond the immediate site, is of a neighborhood or community-wide interest, or is of a
controversial nature. The adaptive reuse shall meet the following criteria in order to be granted
approval:
(1) New traffic shall be accommodated within the existing levels of service on the
surrounding neighborhood streets.
(2) Provision for off-street parking must be evaluated and to the greatest extent possible,
meet the parking demand for change of uses. The Director or Hearing Examiner may reduce
the number of off-street parking spaces if commute trip reduction methods are employed and
the adaptive reuse does not generate an increase in on-street parking demand.
(3) The new use does not generate noise that exceeds City standards for residential zones.
(4) Adequate street trees and landscaping are incorporated in a manner that buffers the
adaptive reuse from adjacent residential uses and makes it more compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood.
(5) Additional conditions may be applied including, but not limited to, limiting hours of
operations, density, restrictions for noise attenuation and other conditions deemed necessary
to ensure compatibility with surrounding residential uses.
(b) The following uses may be approved for adaptive reuse:
(1) Residential, underlying zone density limit, provided no new floor area is constructed;
(21) Foster homes;
(32) Day care facilities;
(43) Group residential facilities, Class I (assisted living);
(54) Youth, teen, senior, or community centers;
20
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(65) Medical and dental clinic and related services (not hospitals);
(76) Religious worship facilities;
(87) Libraries;
(98) Museums and art galleries;
(109) Consultants (architectural, engineering, planning, design and similar);
(1110) Computer assistance and training (but not repair);
(1211 ) Office/business assistance services, call centers, and general offices;
(1312) Social services/facilities;
(1413) Welfare and charitable services/facilities;
(1514) Public services;
(1615) Hotels and lodging places;
(1716) General retail; and
(1817) Restaurants.
SECTION 5. Section 20.46.080(c) of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Mineral Resource Overlay” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.46.080 MINERAL RESOURCE OVERLAY.
(c) Permitting Process. Mineral resource extraction with associated structures and equipment
for soil and gravel, quarried stone or ore may be allowed if a Type III Hearing Examiner II
conditional use permit (CUP) is approved pursuant to BMC 20.58.020, with the notice of
application shall be mailed to all property owners within five hundred (500) feet of the property.
(1) The owner or agent of the quarry shall submit to the City copies of all documents
submitted to the Washington State Department of Natural Resources with the application.
(2) Notice of application for the CUP shall be provided to the local tribal government,
typically during the environmental review; however, if environmental review is not required,
a fourteen (14) day comment period to the local tribal government of the proposal will be
required prior to issuance of approval.
SECTION 6. Section 20.46.080(h) of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Temporary Encampment Permit” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.46.090 TEMPORARY ENCAMPMENT PERMIT.
(h) Duration and Site Restoration.
(1) Duration.
(i) A proposed temporary encampment may be allowed as a Type I Director’s approval
at one (1) property for up to one hundred eighty-three (183) days, either consecutively or
cumulatively, during any twenty-four (24) month period, except that where the one-
hundred-eighty-third day falls on Friday through Sunday, an additional two (2) days shall
21
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
be allowed to dismantle and remove the accommodation over the immediately following
weekend. The applicant and/or property owner shall store, out of sight from adjacent
properties, the residents’ personal belongings that are left on site after the dismantling of
the site.
(ii) A proposed temporary encampment may be allowed as a Type III II conditional use
permit for a period of three (3) years if the following additional approval criteria are met:
(A) The site is located within the district center core, general commercial, freeway
corridor, industrial zone, and Puget Sound Industrial Center; and
(B) Social services are provided, such as access to healthcare, counseling, substance
abuse treatment, and job training programs; and
(C) On-site temporary shelters shall be composed of durable/rigid materials; and
(D) All other criteria per this section are met, except that parcel size limitations per
subsection (c)(2)(i) of this section may be reduced to no less than one-half (0.5) acre.
(E) Applications for a three (3) year extension may be applied for after the first two
(2) years of active permit approval are complete. Applications for extension must be
received six (6) months prior to permit expiration. Only one (1) extension may be
approved at a time.
SECTION 7. Section 20.46.140(d) of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Wireless Communications Facilities” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.46.140 WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES.
(d) Process. The applicant shall provide proof of legal authority to co-locate on an existing
structure, modify an existing structure, or construct a new structure at the time of permit
submittal. This shall include any current franchise agreements for projects located within the
City’s right-of-way and lease agreements on private or City real property. Only a complete
application shall be accepted for review. Prior to acceptance, the permit application shall be
reviewed for completeness. If an application is deemed complete, the application will be
processed and reviewed. The Director has the discretion to elevate a Type I permit to a Type II
permit, and/or a Type II permit to a Type III permit in cases where views from residential
properties or views from the public right-of-way may be affected.
(1) Type I Permit.
(i) An eligible facilities request, as defined by this chapter.
(ii) The installation of new wireless communications facilities in the public right-of-
way.
(2) Type II Permit.
(i) All other wireless communications facilities not exempt by this chapter, and not
eligible for a Type I permit, require a Type II permit.
(ii) A Type II permit, including the notification of adjacent property owners within three
hundred (300) feet, is required for all new wireless communications facilities in residential
zoning districts, and for sites adjacent to residential zones.
22
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
SECTION 8. Section 20.46.170 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Cottage Housing” is hereby added to read as follows:
20.46.170 COTTAGE HOUSING.
(a) Cottage housing developments may be approved in accordance with the following:
(1) Orientation. Lot orientation shall be in accordance with the following standards:
(i) All units with primary street frontage shall first be oriented towards the street,
otherwise the common open space shall act as the street front and all units shall be
oriented towards the common open space.
(ii) Dwellings within a cottage housing development should be broken up into groups
of no more than twelve (12) dwellings arranged around a common open space. The
applicant shall demonstrate all efforts have been made to link housing clusters by ADA
accessible paths and shared parking.
(2) Open Space. The following open space requirements apply to all proposals regardless of
number of units:
(i) A minimum of four hundred (400) square feet of common open space is required per
dwelling unit.
(ii) Parking areas, setbacks, spaces between buildings of ten (10) feet or less in width
and driveways shall not count as common open space.
(3) Parking. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the requirements set
forth in Chapter 20.48 BMC, and the following criteria:
(i) One and one-half (1.5) parking spaces are required for each dwelling unit.
(ii) All parking areas and vehicle circulation shall be consolidated to the degree
feasible.
(iii) Parking areas serving more than one (1) dwelling unit shall not be located on a
primary street frontage and should be located off an alley or a secondary street.
(iv) Garages and carports shall be oriented so that vehicle entrances are located off an
alley or private parking area. All efforts shall be made to not orient vehicle entrances
toward a primary frontage.
(4) Design Standards.
(i) Nonresidential Structures. Accessory structures and attached garages shall meet
design standards per BMC 20.60.060(d), and the combined gross square feet of all
accessory structures shall not exceed eighty (80) percent of the combined footprint of all
on-site residential structures.
(ii) All dwellings shall include a covered front porch that is integrated with the
structure’s architecture. The minimum porch depth shall be six (6) feet, with a minimum
width of ten (10) feet. This area shall not be included in dwelling gross square feet, but
may be included in required open space area.
23
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(5) Nonconformities. An existing detached single-family residential structure, which may
be nonconforming with respect to the standards of this section, shall be permitted to remain,
but the extent of the nonconformity may not be increased. Such nonconforming dwelling
units shall be included in the maximum permitted cottage density.
SECTION 9. Section 20.46.180 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Group Residential Class I” is hereby added to read as follows:
20.46.180 GROUP RESIDENTIAL CLASS I.
(a) Group Residential Class I is permitted in any zone that permits residential uses, provided the
following criteria are met:
(1) All state licensing requirements are satisfied;
(2) Minimum setbacks, height and lot coverage of the underlying zone shall apply;
(3) Off-street parking shall be at a minimum of one (1) space per each employee during the
peak shift, plus one (1) space per two (2) residents the facility will provide service to;
(4) If counseling services are provided to nonresidents, additional parking spaces are
required at one (1) per three hundred (300) square feet of gross floor area used for counseling
services;
(5) The number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the
applicant can demonstrate that parking will not spill over into nearby residential properties
and any streets; and
(6) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential properties.
SECTION 10. Section 20.46.190 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Senior Housing Complex” is hereby added to read as follows:
20.46.190 SENIOR HOUSING COMPLEX.
(a) Senior housing complex is permitted in any zone that permits residential uses, provided the
following criteria are met:
(1) Minimum site area shall be no less than two (2) acres;
(2) Minimum setbacks, density, height and lot coverage of the underlying zone shall apply;
(3) Off-street parking shall be a minimum one (1) space per dwelling;
(4) Except for a community building/clubhouse for the exclusive use of complex residents,
all accessory uses shall be located within a structure containing residential units;
(5) Attached or detached structure types are permitted and dwelling units may be owned by
individuals or occupied as rentals;
(6) Access to alternative transportation such as public transit or on-site shuttle services to
access daily goods or services shall be provided; and
24
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(7) A management agreement or covenants on individual properties to maintain the
complex as a senior citizen complex shall be recorded with the Kitsap County Auditor’s
office.
SECTION 11. Section 20.46.200 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Manufactured Home Park” is hereby added to read as follows:
20.46.200 MANUFACTURED HOME PARK.
(a) A Manufactured Home Park is permitted in any zone that permits residential uses, provided
the following criteria are met:
(1) It is exempt pursuant to RCW 58.17.040 from requirements for property segregation;
(2) The minimum site size shall be five (5) acres;
(3) Density shall meet the underlying zone;
(4) Adequate water, sewer, and utility services are available to all building sites;
(5) A fire protection system meeting the requirements of the City Fire Marshal is provided;
(6) Interior circulation shall meet the City Engineer road standards plus the following
standards:
(i) All interior circulation routes shall be constructed within a tract or easement;
(ii) Roads and driveways shall be paved;
(iii) The City Fire Marshal and City Engineer shall approve all fire turnarounds;
(7) The following setbacks shall apply to manufactured homes or mobile homes, together
with their additions and appurtenant structures, accessory structures, and other structures on
the site (excluding fences), excluding any hitch or towing fixture:
(i) From interior roads, at least fifteen (15) feet from centerline of the tract or easement,
but in no case shall the setback be less than five (5) feet from the paved surfaced edge;
(ii) Structures near the perimeter lot lines of the property shall comply with the setbacks
of the underlying zone;
(iii) A minimum of ten (10) foot separation between all manufactured homes;
(8) Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in the following manner:
(i) One (1) parking space per home site; plus
(ii) One (1) parking space for each five (5) home sites for guest parking; plus
(iii) Additional parking spaces to provide for the parking needs of offices, community
buildings, recreational facilities, or other uses within the park that may be used by p ark
residents or others;
(9) Outside storage of vessels (boats), household items and equipment is prohibited, except
a common central storage area may be provided for residents of the park. The storage area
shall be screened by a minimum five (5) foot high by five (5) foot wide sight-obscuring
barrier consisting of landscaping and fencing or wall, and shall meet minimum setbacks of
the underlying zone;
25
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(10) Ten (10) percent of the site shall be maintained as common recreational open space for
the use of residents and:
(i) May include community areas and facilities such as playgrounds, swimming pools,
and hobby and craft shops;
(ii) However, it shall not include required landscaping areas, perimeter setback areas,
parking areas, storage areas, building separation areas or other areas deemed impractical
by the Director for the recreational enjoyment of the residents;
(11) Trees meeting the standards set forth in Chapter 20.50 BMC shall be provided along
all property lines abutting a residential zone and public streets. Exceptions for trees may be
allowed when a property line abuts an alley or is obstructed by a building or other structure;
(12) Adequate lighting to illuminate streets, driveways, and walkways for the safe
movement of pedestrians and vehicles is required; and
(13) All water, sewer, electrical, and communication service lines shall be underground.
SECTION 12. Section 20.58.020(c) of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Conditional Use Permits” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.58.020 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS.
(c) Procedure. A CUP application may be is processed as an administrative Type II Director
decision or as a nonadministrative Type III Hearing Examiner decision pursuant to the provisions
set forth in Chapter 20.02 BMC. In addition to the notification requirements prescribed in
BMC 20.02.100, the notice of application shall be mailed to all property owners within three
hundred (300) feet of the property.
(1) The Director may require a nonadministrative CUP whenever the use has a significant
impact beyond the immediate site, is of a neighborhood or community-wide interest, or is of
a controversial nature.
(2) The Director may convert a Type II administrative CUP to a Type III nonadministrative
CUP any time prior to the issuance of a decision on the application.
(3) In addition to the notification requirements prescribed in BMC 20.02.100, the notice of
application shall be mailed to all property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the
property.
SECTION 13. Section 20.58.030(c) of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Variance” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.58.030 VARIANCE.
(c) Procedures. A variance application is processed as a Type III Hearing Examiner II
Conditional Use Permit decision pursuant to the provisions set forth in Chapter 20.02 BMC. If
the variation would not exceed ten (10) percent of the required dimensional standard from which
relief is being sought, the Director may approve the variance as a Type II Director decision.
26
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
SECTION 14. Section 20.58.060(c) of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Residential Cluster Development” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.58.060 RESIDENTIAL CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT.
(c) Procedures.
(1) A RCD shall be processed in coordination with a subdivision application and will
follow the permitting procedures established in Chapter 20.12 BMC, Land Division.
(2) The Director has the discretion to convert a Type II administrative subdivision
application that is using the RCD provisions to a Type III nonadministrative conditional use
permit any time prior to the issuance of a decision on the application should the Director find
the project to have significant impacts beyond the immediate site, is of a neighborhood or
community wide interest, or is of a controversial nature.
(32) In addition to the notification requirements prescribed in BMC 20.02.100, the notice
of application shall be mailed to all property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the
property.
SECTION 15. Section 20.58.080(b) of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Site Plan Review” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.58.080 SITE PLAN REVIEW.
(b) Applicability. Site plan review is required for all new development, expansion of existing
structures, or other exterior site improvements that will change the physical conditions of a site.
Permits for interior alterations (construction activities that do not modify the existing site layout
or its current use, and involve no exterior work adding to the building footprint) that do not result
in additional sleeping quarters or bedrooms, do not increase the total square footage or valuation
of the structure thereby requiring upgrading fire access or fire suppression systems, and do not
result in a nonconformity with federal emergency management agency substantial improvement
thresholds, are exempt from site plan review.
SECTION 16. Section 20.58.100(c) of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Affordable Housing Bonus” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.58.100 AFFORDABLE HOUSING BONUS.
(c) Procedure. Approval of an administrative Type II conditional use permit (CUP) pursuant to
BMC 20.58.020 is required. The Director may require a Type III nonadministrative CUP
whenever the use has a significant impact beyond the immediate site, is of a neighborhood or
community-wide interest, or is of a controversial nature. The proposed development shall meet
the following criteria in order to be granted approval:
SECTION 17. Section 20.60.020 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Permitted Uses” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.60.020 PERMITTED USES.
27
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
Only one (1) principal use shall be allowed on each residentially zoned lot unless allowed for
otherwise by law. This limitation shall not include permitted accessory uses associated with a
permitted principal use.
The following uses are permitted outright:
(a) Cemetery;
(b) Colocation of wireless communications per BMC 20.46.140;
(c) Community facilities of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet gross floor area or less;
(d) Day care facility of twelve (12) or fewer persons receiving care;
(e) Education and schools (K-12) of twelve (12) or fewer students;
(f) Foster home;
(g) Group residential home;
(h) Manufactured home per BMC 20.46.040;
(i) Parks, playgrounds and open space equal or less than one-half (0.5) acre (twenty-one
thousand seven hundred eighty (21,780) square feet);
(j) Residential Uses.
(1) Single-unit dwelling unit, detached;
(2) Single-unit dwelling unit, attached (zero (0) lot lines) per BMC 20.60.060(b);
(3) Duplex;
(4) Townhouse;
(5) Cottage housing development of three (3) or less dwelling units meeting the
provisions of per BMC 20.46.170 20.60.040(n), except that no conditional use permit is
required);
(6) Group residential facilities - Class I, per BMC 20.46.180;
(7) Senior housing complex, per BMC 20.46.190;
(8) Manufactured home park or expansion of existing parks, per BMC 20.46.200
(k) Worship and religious facilities of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet gross floor area
or less;
(l) Incubator for business associated with a worship and religious facility or community
facility, provided the following conditions are met:
(1) The incubated business is a use that is permitted outright in the neighborhood
business zone, BMC 20.82.020;
(2) Landscaping and signage requirements of the neighborhood business zone,
Chapter 20.82 BMC, shall be met; and
(3) The parcel upon which the incubated business is situated shall have frontage on an
arterial street.
28
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
SECTION 18. Section 20.60.040 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Conditional Uses” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.60.040 CONDITIONAL USES.
The following uses may be permitted, provided a conditional use permit is approved pursuant to
BMC 20.58.020 subject to the corresponding conditions:
(a) Bed and breakfast, provided:
(1) The operators of the business shall occupy the house as their primary residence;
(2) No more than one (1) full-time equivalent (FTE) employee who is not a resident of
the dwelling may be employed;
(3) No more than six (6) bedrooms are made available for rent to guests and all guest
rooms are contained within the principal structure;
(4) Two (2) off-street parking spaces, plus one (1) off-street parking space per each
guest bedroom, are required;
(5) Off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the applicant can demonstrate
parking will not spill over into nearby residential properties and any streets;
(6) Rooms shall not be made available to guests for more than fourteen (14) days
during any thirty (30) day period;
(7) No commercial receptions, parties, or other public gatherings, or serving of meals to
nonresident guests for compensation, are allowed; and
(8) Any remodeling of the residential structure shall maintain the residential nature of
the structure and not alter the structure in such a manner that would prevent it from being
used as a residence in the future.
(b) Group residential facilities - Class I, provided:
(1) All state licensing requirements are satisfied;
(2) Minimum setbacks, height and lot coverage of the underlying zone shall apply;
(3) Off-street parking shall be at a minimum of one (1) space per each employee during
the peak shift, plus one (1) space per two (2) residents the facility will provide service to;
(4) If counseling services are provided to nonresidents, additional parking spaces are
required at one (1) per three hundred (300) square feet of gross floor area used for
counseling services;
(5) The number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the
applicant can demonstrate that parking will not spill over into nearby residential
properties and any streets; and
(6) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential
properties.
(c) Senior housing complex, provided the following conditions are satisfied:
29
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(1) Minimum site area shall be no less than two (2) acres;
(2) Minimum setbacks, density, height and lot coverage of the underlying zone shall
apply;
(3) Off-street parking shall be a minimum one (1) space per dwelling;
(4) Except for a community building/clubhouse for the exclusive use of complex
residents, all accessory uses shall be located within a structure containing residential
units;
(5) Attached or detached structure types are permitted and dwelling units may be
owned by individuals or occupied as rentals;
(6) Access to alternative transportation such as public transit or on-site shuttle services
to access daily goods or services shall be provided; and
(7) A management agreement or covenants on individual properties to maintain the
complex as a senior citizen complex shall be recorded with the Kitsap County Auditor’s
office.
(db) Nursing/convalescent homes, provided:
(1) All state licensing requirements are satisfied;
(2) Minimum site area shall be no less than one (1) acre;
(3) Minimum setbacks, height and lot coverage of the underlying zone shall apply;
(4) Off-street parking shall be a minimum of one (1) space per six hundred (600) square
feet of gross floor area;
(5) The number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the
applicant can demonstrate that parking will not spill over into nearby residential
properties and any streets; and
(6) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential
properties.
(ec) Day care facilities (thirteen (13) or more persons receiving care), provided:
(1) All state licensing requirements are satisfied;
(2) Off-street parking shall be a minimum one (1) space per each five (5) children based
on the state license maximum occupancy load;
(3) One (1) loading/unloading space without backup is required for the first twenty (20)
children and one (1) additional space for up to each additional twenty (20) children;
(4) The number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the
applicant can demonstrate that parking will not spill over into nearby residential
properties and any streets;
(5) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
30
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential
properties; and
(6) The maximum height of a fence or wall within a front yard setback may be
increased up to six (6) feet, provided it enhances safety and security of an outdoor play
area.
(fd) Adaptive reuse of commercial buildings, provided the conditions set forth in
BMC 20.46.070 are satisfied.
(g) Manufactured home park or expansion of existing parks, provided:
(1) It is exempt pursuant to RCW 58.17.040 from requirements for property
segregation;
(2) The minimum site size shall be five (5) acres;
(3) Density shall meet the underlying zone;
(4) Adequate water, sewer, and utility services are available to all building sites;
(5) A fire protection system meeting the requirements of the City Fire Marshal is
provided;
(6) Interior circulation shall meet the City Engineer road standards plus the following
standards:
(i) All interior circulation routes shall be constructed within a tract or easement;
(ii) Roads and driveways shall be paved;
(iii) The City Fire Marshal and City Engineer shall approve all fire turnarounds;
(7) The following setbacks shall apply to manufactured homes or mobile homes,
together with their additions and appurtenant structures, accessory structures, and other
structures on the site (excluding fences), excluding any hitch or towing fixture:
(i) From interior roads, at least fifteen (15) feet from centerline of the tract or
easement, but in no case shall the setback be less than five (5) feet from the paved
surfaced edge;
(ii) Structures near the perimeter lot lines of the property shall comply with the
setbacks of the underlying zone;
(iii) A minimum of ten (10) foot separation between all manufactured homes;
(8) Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in the following manner:
(i) One (1) parking space per home site; plus
(ii) One (1) parking space for each five (5) home sites for guest parking; plus
(iii) Additional parking spaces to provide for the parking needs of offices,
community buildings, recreational facilities, or other uses within the park that may be
used by park residents or others;
(9) Outside storage of vessels (boats), household items and equipment is prohibited,
except a common central storage area may be provided for residents of the park. The
31
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
storage area shall be screened by a minimum five (5) foot high by five (5) foot wide
sight-obscuring barrier consisting of landscaping and fencing or wall, and shall meet
minimum setbacks of the underlying zone;
(10) Ten (10) percent of the site shall be maintained as common recreational open space
for the use of residents and:
(i) May include community areas and facilities such as playgrounds, swimming pools,
and hobby and craft shops;
(ii) However, it shall not include required landscaping areas, perimeter setback areas,
parking areas, storage areas, building separation areas or other areas deemed impractical
by the Director for the recreational enjoyment of the residents;
(11) Trees meeting the standards set forth in Chapter 20.50 BMC shall be provided
along all property lines abutting a residential zone and public streets. Exceptions for trees
may be allowed when a property line abuts an alley or is obstructed by a building or other
structure;
(12) Adequate lighting to illuminate streets, driveways, and walkways for the safe
movement of pedestrians and vehicles is required; and
(13) All water, sewer, electrical, and communication service lines shall be underground.
(he) Worship, religious, and community facilities greater than twenty thousand (20,000)
square feet, provided:
(1) The site area shall be one (1) acre or more; and
(2) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential
properties.
(if) Golf course, provided:
(1) A site plan review and a site development permit are approved pursuant to
Chapter 20.58 BMC;
(2) Through the conditional use permit, modifications to parking and landscaping may
be allowed in order to facilitate good design;
(3) Other conditions are applied as deemed necessary to mitigate impacts to nearby
residential properties and ensure compatibility with the neighborhood.
(jg) Schools, parks and associated uses may be approved in accordance with the following:
(1) The following uses are permitted through approval of a conditional use permit:
(i) All public schools and associated gymnasiums and auditoriums;
(ii) Private schools (K-12) with thirteen (13) or more students;
(iii) Parks and playgrounds greater than one-half (1/2) acre;
(iv) Outdoor athletic fields;
(v) Boat launching and related facilities;
32
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(vi) Maintenance and service yards;
(vii) Bus and other vehicle and equipment maintenance and storage facilities;
(viii) Administrative office related to the facilities greater than two thousand (2,000)
square feet gross floor area;
(ix) Buildings and structures for nonprofit groups on public lands;
(2) Uses permitted pursuant to subsection (j)(1) of this section shall be subject to
complying with the following conditions:
(i) Front, side and rear yard setbacks of structures and outdoor storage areas shall be
at least thirty (30) feet;
(ii) Setbacks may be reduced for those portions of a structure fronting interior
streets;
(iii) The maximum height for any new construction may be increased to match the
architecture of existing buildings; provided, that it is set back an additional foot from
any property line for each additional foot of allowed height, and in no case shall the
new construction exceed forty-five (45) feet;
(iv) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential
uses prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening
purposes may be required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining
residential properties;
(v) Additional measures may be required if deemed necessary to mitigate any noise
impacts to adjacent residential uses; and
(vi) The maximum height of a fence or wall within a front yard setback may be
increased to six (6) feet, provided it enhances safety and security around an outdoor
play area.
(kh) Public utility facilities located above ground, provided:
(1) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential
properties;
(2) The maximum height of a fence or wall may be increased within a front yard
setback that will provide screening from adjacent uses and enhance safety and security
around the facility; and
(3) Exceptions to setbacks may be allowed if the applicant can demonstrate that the
public interest is better served by allowing the modification.
(li) Law enforcement and fire facilities, provided:
(1) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential
properties.
33
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(2) The maximum height of a fence or wall may be increased within a front yard
setback that will provide screening from adjacent uses and enhance safety and security
around the facility.
(mj) Mineral resource extraction per BMC 20.46.080, provided:
(1) The site is located within a mineral resource overlay.
(n) Cottage housing development consisting of four (4) or more dwellings may be approved
in accordance with the following:
(1) Orientation. Lot orientation shall be in accordance with the following standards:
(i) All units with primary street frontage shall first be oriented towards the street,
otherwise the common open space shall act as the street front and all units shall be
oriented towards the common open space.
(ii) Dwellings within a cottage housing development should be broken up into
groups of no more than twelve (12) dwellings arranged around a common open space.
The applicant shall demonstrate all efforts have been made to link housing clusters by
ADA accessible paths and shared parking.
(2) Open Space. The following open space requirements apply to all proposals
regardless of number of units:
(i) A minimum of four hundred (400) square feet of common open space is required
per dwelling unit.
(ii) Parking areas, setbacks, spaces between buildings of ten (10) feet or less in
width and driveways shall not count as common open space.
(3) Parking. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with the requirements
set forth in Chapter 20.48 BMC, and the following criteria:
(i) One and one-half (1.5) parking spaces are required for each dwelling unit.
(ii) All parking areas and vehicle circulation shall be consolidated to the degree
feasible.
(iii) Parking areas serving more than one (1) dwelling unit shall not be located on a
primary street frontage and should be located off an alley or a secondary street.
(iv) Garages and carports shall be oriented so that vehicle entrances are located off
an alley or private parking area. All efforts shall be made to not orient vehicle
entrances toward a primary frontage.
(4) Design Standards.
(i) Nonresidential Structures. Accessory structures and attached garages shall meet
design standards per BMC 20.60.060(d), and the combined gross square feet of all
accessory structures shall not exceed eighty (80) percent of the combined footprint of
all on-site residential structures.
(ii) All dwellings shall include a covered front porch that is integrated with the
structure’s architecture. The minimum porch depth shall be six (6) feet, with a
34
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
minimum width of ten (10) feet. This area shall not be included in dwelling gross
square feet, but may be included in required open space area.
(5) Nonconformities. An existing detached single-family residential structure, which
may be nonconforming with respect to the standards of this section, shall be permitted to
remain, but the extent of the nonconformity may not be increased. Such nonconforming
dwelling units shall be included in the maximum permitted cottage density.
SECTION 19. Section 20.78.020 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Outright Permitted Uses” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.78.020 OUTRIGHT PERMITTED USES.
The following uses are permitted outright:
(a) Cemetery;
(b) Co-location of wireless communications per BMC 20.46.140;
(c) Community facilities of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet gross floor area or less;
(d) Day care facility of twelve (12) or fewer persons receiving care;
(e) Education and schools (K-12) of twelve (12) or fewer students;
(f) Foster home;
(g) Group residential home;
(h) Manufactured home per BMC 20.46.040;
(i) Parks, playgrounds and open space equal or less than one-half (1/2) acre (twenty-one
thousand seven hundred eighty (21,780) square feet);
(j) Residential Uses.
(1) Single-unit dwelling unit, detached;
(2) Single-unit dwelling unit, attached (zero (0) lot lines) per BMC 20.78.060(b);
(3) Duplexes (meeting underlying zoning density);
(4) Townhouse (meeting underlying zoning density);
(5) Cottage housing meeting the provisions of BMC 20.46.170 20.60.040(n), except that no
conditional use permit is required);
(6) Group residential facilities Class I per BMC 20.46.180;
(7) Senior housing complex per BMC 20.46.190;
(8) Manufactured home park per BMC 20.46.200
(k) Worship and religious facilities of twenty thousand (20,000) square feet gross floor area
or less;
(l) Incubator for business associated with a worship and religious facility or community
facility, provided the following conditions are met:
35
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(1) The incubated business is a use that is permitted outright in the neighborhood business
zone, BMC 20.82.020;
(2) Landscaping and signage requirements of the neighborhood business zone,
Chapter 20.82 BMC, shall be met; and
(3) The parcel upon which the incubated business is situated shall have frontage on an
arterial street.
SECTION 20. Section 20.78.040 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Conditional Uses” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.78.040 CONDITIONAL USES.
The following uses may be permitted, provided a conditional use permit is approved pursuant to
BMC 20.58.020 subject to the corresponding conditions:
(a) Bed and breakfast, provided:
(1) The operators of the business shall occupy the house as their primary residence;
(2) No more than one (1) full-time equivalent (FTE) employee who is not a resident of the
dwelling may be employed;
(3) No more than six (6) bedrooms are made available for rent to guests and all guest rooms
are contained within the principal structure;
(4) Two (2) off-street parking spaces, plus one (1) off-street parking space per each guest
bedroom, are required;
(5) Off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the applicant can demonstrate
parking will not spill over into nearby residential properties and any streets;
(6) Rooms shall not be made available to guests for more than fourteen (14) days during
any thirty (30) day period;
(7) No commercial receptions, parties, or other public gatherings, or serving of meals to
nonresident guests for compensation, are allowed; and
(8) Any remodeling of the residential structure shall maintain the residential nature of the
structure and not alter the structure in such a manner that would prevent it from being used as
a residence in the future.
(b) Group residential facilities - Class I, provided:
(1) All state licensing requirements are satisfied;
(2) Minimum setbacks, height and lot coverage of the underlying zone shall apply;
(3) Off-street parking shall be at a minimum of one (1) space per each employee during the
peak shift, plus one (1) space per two (2) residents the facility will provide service to;
(4) If counseling services are provided to nonresidents, additional parking spaces are
required at one (1) per three hundred (300) square feet of gross floor area used for counseling
services;
36
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(5) The number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the
applicant can demonstrate that parking will not spill over into nearby residential properties
and any streets; and
(6) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential properties.
(c) Senior housing complex,provided the following conditions are satisfied:
(1) Minimum site area shall be no less than two (2) acres;
(2) Minimum setbacks, density, height and lot coverage of the underlying zone shall apply;
(3) Off-street parking shall be a minimum one (1) space per dwelling;
(4) Except for a community building/clubhouse for the exclusive use of complex residents,
all accessory uses shall be located within a structure containing residential units;
(5) Attached or detached structure types are permitted and dwelling units may be owned by
individuals or occupied as rentals;
(6) Access to alternative transportation such as public transit or on-site shuttle services to
access daily goods or services shall be provided; and
(7) A management agreement or covenants on individual properties to maintain the
complex as a senior citizen complex shall be recorded with the Kitsap County Auditor’s
office.
(db) Nursing/convalescent homes, provided:
(1) All state licensing requirements are satisfied;
(2) Minimum site area shall be no less than one (1) acre;
(3) Minimum setbacks, height and lot coverage of the underlying zone shall apply;
(4) Off-street parking shall be a minimum of one (1) space per six hundred (600) square
feet of gross floor area;
(5) The number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the
applicant can demonstrate that parking will not spill over into nearby residential properties
and any streets; and
(6) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential properties.
(ec) Day care facilities (thirteen (13) or more persons receiving care), provided:
(1) All state licensing requirements are satisfied;
(2) Off-street parking shall be a minimum one (1) space per each five (5) children based on
the state license maximum occupancy load;
(3) One (1) loading/unloading space without backup is required for the first twenty (20)
children and one (1) additional space for up to each additional twenty (20) children;
37
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(4) The number of required off-street parking spaces may be reduced, provided the
applicant can demonstrate that parking will not spill over into nearby residential properties
and any streets;
(5) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential properties;
and
(6) The maximum height of a fence or wall within a front yard setback may be increased up
to six (6) feet, provided it enhances safety and security of an outdoor play area.
(fd) Adaptive reuse of commercial buildings, provided the conditions set forth in
BMC 20.46.070 are satisfied.
(he) Worship, religious, and community facilities greater than twenty thousand (20,000) square
feet, provided:
(1) The site area shall be one (1) acre or more; and
(2) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential properties.
(if) Golf course, provided:
(1) A site plan review and a site development permit are approved pursuant to
Chapter 20.58 BMC;
(2) Through the conditional use permit, modifications to parking and landscaping may be
allowed in order to facilitate good design;
(3) Other conditions are applied as deemed necessary to mitigate impacts to nearby
residential properties and ensure compatibility with the neighborhood.
(jg) Schools, parks and associated uses may be approved in accordance with the following:
(1) The following uses are permitted through approval of a conditional use permit:
(i) All public schools and associated gymnasiums and auditoriums;
(ii) Private schools (K-12) with thirteen (13) or more students;
(iii) Parks and playgrounds greater than one-half (1/2) acre;
(iv) Outdoor athletic fields;
(v) Boat launching and related facilities;
(vi) Maintenance and service yards;
(vii) Bus and other vehicle and equipment maintenance and storage facilities;
(viii) Administrative office related to the facilities greater than two thousand (2,000)
square feet gross floor area;
(ix) Buildings and structures for nonprofit groups on public lands;
38
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
(2) Uses permitted pursuant to subsection (j)(1) of this section shall be subject to
complying with the following conditions:
(i) Front, side and rear yard setbacks of structures and outdoor storage areas shall be at
least thirty (30) feet;
(ii) Setbacks may be reduced for those portions of a structure fronting interior streets;
(iii) The maximum height for any new construction may be increased to match the
architecture of existing buildings; provided, that it is set back an additional foot from any
property line for each additional foot of allowed height, and in no case shall the new
construction exceed forty-five (45) feet;
(iv) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential
uses prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes
may be required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential
properties;
(v) Additional measures may be required if deemed necessary to mitigate any noise
impacts to adjacent residential uses; and
(vi) The maximum height of a fence or wall within a front yard setback may be
increased to six (6) feet, provided it enhances safety and security around an outdoor play
area.
(kh) Public utility facilities located above ground, provided:
(1) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential properties;
(2) The maximum height of a fence or wall may be increased within a front yard setback
that will provide screening from adjacent uses and enhance safety and security around the
facility; and
(3) Exceptions to setbacks may be allowed if the applicant can demonstrate that the public
interest is better served by allowing the modification.
(li) Law enforcement and fire facilities, provided:
(1) Landscaping is provided meeting the minimum requirements for nonresidential uses
prescribed in Chapter 20.50 BMC. Additional landscaping for screening purposes may be
required if it is found necessary to mitigate any impacts to adjoining residential properties.
(2) The maximum height of a fence or wall may be increased within a front yard setback
that will provide screening from adjacent uses and enhance safety and security around the
facility. (Ord. 5301 §3 (Exh. B) (part), 2016)
SECTION 21. Section 20.79.020 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Outright Permitted Uses” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.79.020 OUTRIGHT PERMITTED USES.
39
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
The following uses are permitted outright:
(a) Co-location of wireless communications per BMC 20.46.140;
(b) Residential Use. Dwelling units, including a duplex or townhouse, must meet the
underlying density of this zone unless otherwise allowed for by state law or City code.
Residential uses include:
(1) Day care facility (twelve (12) or fewer persons receiving care);
(2) Foster home;
(3) Class I group residential facility;
(4) Multi-unit dwelling units;
(5) Single-unit dwelling unit, attached (zero (0) lot lines);
(6) Single-unit dwelling unit, detached;
(7) Townhouses;
(8) Duplexes.
(9) Senior housing complex per BMC 20.46.190.
SECTION 22. Section 20.79.040 of the Bremerton Municipal Code entitled
“Conditional Uses” is hereby amended to read as follows:
20.79.040 CONDITIONAL USES.
The following conditional uses shall be permitted pursuant to BMC 20.58.020, provided the
conditional use complies with the corresponding standard as listed in BMC 20.60.040 (low
density residential (R-10) zone), except the criteria for minimum site area is not applicable to this
zone for the following uses:
(a) Bed and breakfast;
(b) Senior housing complex;
(cb) Nursing/convalescent home;
(dc) Day care facilities (more than twelve (12) persons receiving care);
(ed) Worship, religious, and community facilities;
(fe) Schools, parks and associated facilities of the types set forth in BMC 20.60.040(j).
SECTION 23. 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 24. 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
40
Title 20 BMC Updates – Zoning Code Amendments
validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and
effect.
SECTION 25. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2025.
PASSED by the City Council the___________ day of ____________________, 2024.
_________________________________
JENNIFER CHAMBERLIN, Council President
Approved this ________ day of _____________________, 2024.
_________________________________
GREG WHEELER, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________ ________________________________
ANGELA HOOVER, City Clerk KYLIE FINNELL, City Attorney
PUBLISHED the ________ day of ______________________, 2024.
EFFECTIVE the ________ day of ______________________, 2025.
ORDINANCE NO. ____________
R:\Legal\Legal\Ordinances\Community Development\2022.08.29 Ordinance - Title 20 - Legal edits.docx
AGENDA BILL
CITY OF BREMERTON
CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Study Session Date: January 22, 2025
Supplemental Agreement No. 4 with HDR
Engineering, Inc. for the Naval Ave: 1st
Street to 15th Street Pedestrian and Bicycle
Enhancements Project
COUNCIL MEETING Date: February 5, 2025
Department: PW & Utilities
Presenter: Vicki Grover
Phone: (360) 473-2317
SUMMARY: In December of 2019, the City executed a contract (#6063) with HDR for the design of
the Naval A ve : 1st Street to 15th Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Enhancements Project in the amount
of $61 4,400 . Supplement No. 01 through No. 03 have been executed; extending the contract term to
December 31, 2026, and increasing the contract value to $853,324. This proposed Supplement No.
4 is for the Right Of Way Phase of the project; scope of work is for time and expenses related to Real
Estate Services. These work tasks include but are not limited to, services to support property
acquisition and documentation, extension of time for project management and design services to
incorporate changes from Right of Way acquisition. This Supplement will increase the contract
amount by $1,460,952 (Total $2,314,276) and extend the contract term to December 31, 2030. In
addition, the contract amount for this Supplement also includes escalation costs from 2020 to 2024
for HDR and 3 sub-consultants.
ATTACHMENTS: 1) Supplement No. 4 with HDR 2) January 15, 2025 Council Meeting
Presentation 3) January 21, 2025 Public Works Committee Presentation on Alternatives
5) October 5, 2021 & November 5, 2021 Stakeholder Advisory Group Meeting Minutes
FISCAL IMPACTS (Include Budgeted Amount) No fiscal impacts. This project cost is included in
the Transportation Capital Projects (TransCap) budget.
STUDY SESSION ACTION: ☐ Consent Agenda ☒General Business ☐Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move to approve Supplemental Agreement No. 4 with HDR Engineering, Inc. for the Naval Ave : 1st
Street – 15th Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Enhancements Project; and authorize the Mayor to
finalize and execute the agreement with substantially the same terms and conditions as presented.
Motion approved:
Move to refer the Naval Ave Right of Way Acquisition, Contract Modification 4, to the Public Works
Committee directing them to collaborate with Engineering Division and Administration to explore a
compromise and report back to the Council with recommendations at the study session meeting on
January 22nd.
COUNCIL ACTION: Approve Deny Table Continue No Action
Form Updated 01/02/2018
B9
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
04 HDR Engineering, Inc.
929 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1300
Bellevue, WA 98004
(425)-450-6200
315028 (City Contract 6063)
HLP-PB19(006)February 13, 2020 December 31, 2030
Naval Avenue- 1st Street to 15th Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Enhancements 2,314,276.71
This scope of work includes time and expenses for Real Estate Services for the Right Of Way Phase. These
activities include but are not limited to services to support property acquisition and documentation, extension
of time for project management and design services to incorporate changes from Right of Way acquisition.
City of Bremerton
HDR Engineering Inc.
2/13/20 315028 (City Contract 6063)
See Exhibit A
12-31-30
See Exhibit B
Paul Ferrier, HDR Engineering Inc.Greg Wheeler, Mayor City of Bremerton
Naval Avenue: 1st St to 15th St Bicycle and
Pedestrian Enhancement Project
City Project No. 315028
Scope for Design and Right-of-Way Services
CONTRACT MODIFICATION #4
(Amendment #9)
September 2024
City of Bremerton
Prepared by:
HDR
929 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1300
Bellevue, WA 98004
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 2 of 15
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 3
Scope of Work ..................................................................................................................................................3
Project Description ...........................................................................................................................................3
Major Milestone Schedule ................................................................................................................................3
TASK 1. PROJECT MANAGEMENT & ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................. 4
TASK 2. QUALITY ASSURANCE / QUALITY CONTROL ................................................................................. 4
TASK 3. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ................................................................................................................ 4
TASK 4. STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION ................................................................................................... 4
TASK 5. DATA COLLECTION / REVIEW OF EXISTING INFORMATION ........................................................... 5
TASK 6. SURVEY AND MAPPING ............................................................................................................... 5
TASK 7. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING .................................................................................................... 5
TASK 8. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................... 5
TASK 9. BASIS OF DESIGN ........................................................................................................................ 5
TASK 10. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION & PERMITTING ASSISTANCE .............................................. 6
TASK 11. 30% DESIGN ............................................................................................................................... 6
TASK 12. FINAL DESIGN - PS&E .................................................................................................................. 6
TASK 13. REAL ESTATE SERVICES ............................................................................................................... 6
TASK 14. DESIGN SERVICES DURING ROW PHASE .................................................................................... 15
TASK 15. MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND ................................................................................................. 15
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 3 of 15
INTRODUCTION
During the term of this PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (AGREEMENT), HDR Engineering, Inc.
(CONSULTANT) shall perform professional services for the City of Bremerton (CITY) in connection with the
following project: Naval Avenue: 1st St to 15th St Bicycle and Pedestrian Enhancement Project (PROJECT).
Contract Modification #4 keeps intact the overall terms of the original agreement and the previously
executed amendments.
Scope of Work
This Contract Modification #4 scope of work includes time and expenses for the Right-of-Way (ROW) phase of
the project. The additional scope of work includes project management efforts extending the project
timeline, services for support of ROW acquisition, design services to incorporate design changes from right of
way acquisition and grant support.
Project Description
The PROJECT rebalances the existing roadway section to remove barriers to non-motorized travel by adjusting
the number and width of vehicular lanes, adding bicycle facilities, and enhancing pedestrian facilities. The
PROJECT will provide ADA improvements to the maximum extent feasible throughout the project limits. As
part of this roadway reconfiguration project, the following will be included, pavement resurfacing, curb and
gutter, signing and striping to support continuous bike facilities, more robust pedestrian facilities, signal
modifications, street lighting, way finding signage, utility relocations, and stormwater improvements. This is a
multimodal improvement project identified in the City’s 2007 Non-motorized Transportation Plan.
Major Milestone Schedule
Contract Modification #3 modifies the schedule as follows:
Notice to Proceed……………………. Complete
Identify the Basis of Design ....... Complete
30% Design ................................. Complete
60% Design and ROW Plan ......... Complete
90% Design ................................. Complete
100% Design ............................... TBD
ROW …………………………………………2024 - 2027
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 4 of 15
Advertisement………………………… TBD (Depending on Funding)
Contract Modification #4 Project Tasks
The CONSULTANT shall manage the work as described within the following major Work Elements:
TASK 1. PROJECT MANAGEMENT &
ADMINISTRATION
Task 1 is modified to include additional time for project PM and Accountant to execute the amendment,
update project budget, billings, and invoicing throughout the life of the contract. Also, includes processing
amendments to subconsultants for additional work as part of this amendment.
Assumption(s):
· This scope assumes up to 30 monthly invoices.
· Includes up to 24 biweekly meetings, assuming periods of no activity.
· Attendance of ROW kickoff Meeting
Deliverable(s):
· Up to 30 additional invoices and progress reports.
· Meeting agendas and notes
TASK 2. QUALITY ASSURANCE / QUALITY CONTROL
No change to this task from original scope
TASK 3. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
No change to this task from original scope
TASK 4. STAKEHOLDER COORDINATION
No change to this task from original scope
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 5 of 15
TASK 5. DATA COLLECTION / REVIEW OF EXISTING
INFORMATION
No change to this task from original scope
TASK 6. SURVEY AND MAPPING
No change to this task from original scope
TASK 7. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING
No change to this task from original scope
TASK 8. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Task 8 is modified to add scope to perform a traffic signal warrant analysis of the 15th Street signalized
intersection. Signal warrant analysis will follow latest guidance from updated MUTCD.
Assumption(s):
· Effort accounts for collecting new traffic turn movement counts at the 15th Street signal to meet the
latest MUTCD data collection needs for the 1-hour, 4-hour and 8-hour signal warrants. To be
collected and provide by count vendor.
· Analysis will include safety review of latest 5 years of crash data, review of sight distance
requirements for existing and planned intersection configuration.
Deliverable(s):
· Draft and final traffic signal warrant analysis memo with recommendation
TASK 9. BASIS OF DESIGN
No change to this task from original scope
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 6 of 15
TASK 10. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
No change to this task from original scope
TASK 11. 30% DESIGN
No change to this task from original scope
TASK 12. FINAL DESIGN - PS&E
Task 12 is modified to cover additional cost for rate escalation from original scoping in 2020 to staff rates in
2024. In addition to added effort for out of ROW impacts and additional complexity of work for realignment
and redesign of the north segment of the project from 11th Street to 15th Street. The alternative that was
selected for the design impacts ROW on both sides of the street adding additional design for sidewalks,
drainage, and driveway reconstruction. For utility coordination this scope adds budget to generate utility
coordination exhibits and more support time to assist with franchise utility coordination and management of
design by utilities.
Assumption(s):
· Removal of trees and replacement of sidewalk and drainage along the west side of Naval Ave fronting
the cemetery property.
· Utility coordination exhibits to account for vertical structures and overhead utility and
communications.
Deliverable(s):
· Up to ten (10) utility coordination exhibits
· Updates for 100% design package per original scope
TASK 13. REAL ESTATE SERVICES
The objective of this task is to provide the necessary effort required by the CONSULTANT to complete the
Real Estate Services management, valuation, negotiation, and acquisition for the CITY for up to eighty-three
(83) parcels. It is anticipated that these services will be completed within a period of thirty (30) months.
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 7 of 15
Assumption(s):
· These tasks are based upon the most current WSDOT approved Right-of-Way Plans and Right of Way
Funding Estimate, which identifies eighty-three (83) parcels for acquisition.
· The CONSULTANT shall perform right of way acquisition in accordance with the Federal Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisitions Policies Act (URA), WSDOT LAG Manual
guidelines, applicable State and local laws, CITY ROW procedures, WSDOT Right of Way Manual, and
CITY administrative rules.
· CITY shall provide CONSULTANT with available project information such as, but not limited to, the
CITY’s WSDOT approved ROW procedures (approved within the last three years), approved
environmental documentation, and any pre-approved CITY ROW forms, including legal documents, if
available and as needed.
· CONSULTANT and CITY agree to maintain clear lines of communication, determine, and document the
appropriate decision-making process to achieve project goals, and to provide open access to available
data that is pertinent to the project.
· Real Estate Services will acquire up to eighty-three (83) parcels which will consist of permanent
easements (PE) and/or temporary construction easements (TCE) and fee acquisitions of a complete
parcel. Any additional parcels not included will be considered an increased level of effort and will be
renegotiated and adjusted accordingly.
· All deliverables will be produced in accordance with the approved quality control/quality assurance
(QC/QA) process established by the CITY and the CONSULTANT team.
· All deliverables prepared by CONSULTANT shall be provided to the CITY – one (1) electronic version
and one (1) hard copy.
PRE-ACQUISITION AND DATA MANAGEMENT
CONSULTANT shall order title reports and obtain any right of entry agreements needed for the project
described as follows:
· Order title reports and circulate title reports to the project team.
· Acquire right of entry agreements (ROE), with ROE requests being mailed out and a maximum of two
(2) additional contacts being made for each parcel.
CITY Responsibilities:
· Review and approve title reports and pay title report invoice.
· Review and approve ROE agreement and cover letter.
· Identify and authorize any parcels needing right of entry agreements.
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 8 of 15
· CITY and CONSULTANT will reassess any ROE negotiations that are unsuccessful after three attempts
to determine if modifications to scope and budget are required.
Assumption(s):
· CONSULTANT shall order a maximum of eighty-three (83) title reports with one copy of each title
report and any supporting documentation (e.g., copies of covenants affecting legal description,
deeds, etc.) supplied to CONSULTANT.
· CONSULTANT shall prepare all necessary documents and make a maximum of three landowner
contacts for any right of entry agreement request.
· There will be a maximum of two (2) right of entry agreement requests.
Deliverables:
· Title Reports
· Right of Entry Documents and Signed Agreements
MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE REAL ESTATE SERVICES RIGHT- OF-WAY (ROW) PROCESS
CONSULTANT will provide management, administration, coordination, direction, and guidance for the
following ROW tasks:
· Prepare for and attend ROW kickoff meeting and monthly project update meetings with the CITY.
· Prepare and provide an updated landowner list, preliminary ROW cost estimate (RFE), and ROW
schedule.
· Prepare and provide monthly ROW project status report to include acquisition milestones upon
commencement of the valuation process.
· Manage CONSULTANT staff to provide the most expeditious schedule for the delivery of the ROW
portion of the project.
· Manage CONSULTANT’s ROW subconsultants, including complying with and entering payments to
DBEs into WSDOT’s DMCS system.
· Provide 5 days notice to CITY staff when DBE subconsultants are scheduled to perform work for the
purpose of performing CUF reviews.
· Provide QA/QC services.
CITY Responsibilities:
· Attend ROW kickoff meeting and monthly project update meetings with the CONSULTANT.
· Review and approve landowner contact list, RFE, and ROW schedule.
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 9 of 15
· Review monthly status reports and provide comments as needed.
Assumption(s):
· Up to two (2) CONSULTANT RES staff will attend the ROW kickoff meeting. Staff commitment is
estimated at two (2) hours per staff for preparation and participation.
· Up to one (1) CONSULTANT staff will attend up to twelve (12) recurring monthly client meetings to be
held virtually. Staff time commitment is estimated at two (2) hours per staff, per meeting, for
preparation, participation in the meeting, and meeting notes.
· Up to two (2) CONSULTANT RES staff will attend up to twelve (12) recurring monthly internal
meetings. Staff time commitment is estimated at one (1) hour per staff and per meeting for
preparation, participation in the meeting, and notes.
· All meetings with the CITY are anticipated to be held online by virtual capacity. If any meetings are
held in person, the increased level of effort will be renegotiated and adjusted accordingly.
· Update to ROW cost estimate (RFE).
· Up to one (1) ROW schedule and up to one (1) update will be prepared.
Deliverables:
· One (1) Landowner Contact List
· One (1) RFE and up to one (1) update
· One (1) ROW Schedule and up to one (1) update
· Up to twelve (12) Monthly ROW Project Status Reports Up to twelve (12) Monthly ROW Project
Status Reports
VALUATION PROCESS (AOS, APPRAISAL AND APPRAISAL REVIEW, EXHIBITS AND LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS)
CONSULTANT will manage the valuation process for up to eighty-three (83) parcels. As part of the valuation
process, Administrative Offer Summary (AOS) reports, full appraisal reports, and review appraisal reports will
be prepared. CONSULTANT shall meet all requirements set forth in 49 CFR 24.103. CONSULTANT will perform
the following tasks:
· Prepare a schedule for delivery of AOS reports, appraisal, and review reports.
· Assemble all needed valuation data, exhibit and scope for each AOS assigned.
· Send out landowner contact letters to all affected parcels in advance of the valuation, if needed.
· Manage the delivery of up to seventy-eight (78) AOS reports.
· Manage the delivery of up to five (5) Appraisal report and five (5) Appraisal Review.
· Develop up to eighty-three (83) parcel exhibits and legal descriptions.
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 10 of 15
CITY Responsibilities:
· Review and approve valuation (AOS) schedule.
· Review and approve by signature all AOS reports.
· Review and approve parcel exhibits and legal descriptions
Assumption(s):
· CITY shall provide all information to CONSULTANT that is required to complete the assigned
appraisals, typically information from City permitting department.
· It is anticipated there will be a total of up to seventy-eight (78) parcel AOS reports. Five (5) Appraisal
report and five (5) Appraisal Review report. Appraisal Review report.
· Valuations for AOS’s will be based on comparable properties of the same type, size, use and
configuration.
· If it is determined that the value of any parcel is more than $35,000, or the valuation is determined to
be complex in nature, or an appraisal is necessary, the cost for the appraisal, appraisal review and
level of effort for those parcels will be renegotiated and adjusted accordingly. This will result in
additional costs to the CITY.
· For the appraisals that are needed, the following applies:
o All valuation services will be performed by a certified independent appraiser.
o Appraisals will be before and after short form narrative appraisal reports.
o NTP for the appraiser will be the date of receipt of sufficient right of way plans or exhibits;
title information; and landowner contact information.
o The estimated delivery schedule for the appraisal reports and AOS documents is within ten
(10) weeks from the date of NTP.
o NTP for the review appraiser will be upon delivery of the appraisal report. Estimated delivery
time is 30 days from NTP.
Deliverables:
· Valuation schedule.
· Draft and Final Administrative Offer Summary Reports.
· Landowner contact letters, if applicable.
· Appraisal Reports.
· Appraisal Reviews.
· Up to eighty-three (83) parcel exhibits and legal descriptions
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 11 of 15
ACQUISITION AND NEGOTIATION SERVICES
CONSULTANT will prepare offer packages, present offers, and negotiate purchases, prepare administrative
settlement memos, prepare executed documents for CITY approval and processing for a maximum of eighty-
three (83) acquisition parcels. All files will be transmitted to the CITY with all original documents at the
completion of negotiations. Services include:
· Prepare and maintain electronic and hard copy parcel files.
· Review title reports (limited to the last deed of record for up to eighty-three (83) parcels).
· Review ROW plans, exhibits and legal descriptions for up to eighty-three (83) parcels.
· Prepare and provide all documents required for the assigned parcels including Offer Letters,
Easements, W-9s, Real Property Vouchers, Real Estate Tax Affidavits, Escrow Agreements (if
applicable), and Negotiator Diaries.
· Make corrections based on WSDOT spot check comments of AOS offer packets
· Act as the agent of the CITY in negotiations.
· Make a maximum of four (4) good faith contact attempts with each of the impacted landowners in an
effort to negotiate a fair settlement.
· Acquire fee acquisition, permanent easements and temporary easements, as approved by the CITY.
· Provide a justification memorandum for settlements above the approved offering price, for approval
by the CITY.
· Provide a condemnation cover memorandum and parcel file, as approved by the CITY.
· Process all landowner payments through the CITY.
· Transmit completed parcel files to the CITY.
CITY Responsibilities:
· Provide CONSULTANT with a copy of WSDOT approved Right-of-Way acquisition procedures dated
within the last 3 years (if available).
· Approve all real estate documents and forms that CONSULTANT will use consistent with CITY
acquisition practice.
· Approve a minimum of one (1) preliminary offer package prior to any offer being made.
· Provide written approval for all administrative settlements agreed to by the City.
· Approve all landowner payments.
· Make prompt payment to the owner or Escrow Company for all approved acquisitions.
· Review and approve all transmitted files prepared by the CONSULTANT.
· Record all necessary documents upon receipt of transmitted files.
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 12 of 15
Assumption(s):
· CONSULTANT shall follow the Uniform Relocation Act, WSDOT Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) manual,
all applicable State and Local laws and CITY administrative rules for R/W acquisition for all real estate
services provided for this project. WSDOT ROW Manual procedures & guidelines.
· CITY will provide the CONSULTANT with available project information such as but not limited to the
CITY’s WSDOT approved R/W procedures, if available.
· The CONSULTANT’s title review responsibilities shall be to identify the correct vesting from the title
report, inputting that information into the appropriate acquisition documents.
· CONSULTANT shall make the initial offer to purchase in person if possible, or by certified mail.
· CONSULTANT shall provide a maximum of four (4) good- faith attempts at negotiations for up to
eighty-three (83) parcels assigned, with those attempts being defined as an in-person visit with
landowner (physical or virtual), a detailed phone conversation, a substantive correspondence or
email exchange.
· If negotiations cannot be concluded within 90 days of the offer date on any given parcel or if an
appraisal is requested by a landowner of any AOS parcel, then the hours to complete those parcels
will be re-negotiated and adjusted accordingly.
· CONSULTANT’S acquisition duties shall be deemed complete if any of the following occur:
o A negotiated settlement approved by the CITY is reached and the necessary closing
documents are executed.
o The offer to purchase is rescinded by the City and the parcel is no longer needed.
o A P&U is secured, and the acquisition file is transmitted to CITY.
o A negotiated settlement cannot be reached after the fourth good faith attempt.
o If an impasse is reached during negotiations, the entire parcel file shall be turned over to the
CITY for further action, including determination to eliminate acquisition of property.
· The CITY agrees to pay all title, closing, escrow or other fees (if applicable).
Deliverables:
o Up to eighty-three (83) Offer packages with executed acquisition documents for closing by
the CITY.
o Up to one (1) QA/QC review of offer packages, including ROW Plans, legal descriptions and
exhibits for up to eighty-three (83) parcels.
o Administrative settlement memorandum (if needed).
o Possession and Use Agreements (if needed).
o Files recommended for condemnation proceedings (if needed).
o Up to eighty-three (83) completed parcel files.
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 13 of 15
RELOCATION SERVICES
CONSULTANT following the relocation plan, will prepare and present all relocation notices and benefit letters,
provide relocation services, prepare, and develop an appeals process, administer relocation reviews and
appeals, prepare executed documents for City approval, and process all relocation payments for up to one (1)
Landlord business and three (3) residential relocations and one (1) personal property only (PPO). At the end
of the project all relocation files will be transmitted to the CITY with all the original documents.
· Develop appeals process and provide one staff member for the relocation review panel.
· Prepare all relocation documents per Chapter 12 of the WSDOT ROW Manual.
· Act as the CITY’s relocation agent for all affected parcels.
· Administer relocation reviews and approvals.
· Process all relocation payments.
· Transmit completed files to CITY.
CITY Responsibilities:
· Review and approve the relocation appeals process and provide at least one CITY staff members
to sit on the relocation review panel.
· Approve the format of all documents used.
· Review and authorize all relocation payments in advance.
· Make prompt payment to displacees for all approved relocations.
· Review and approve all transmitted files.
· Provide check copies as proof of payments to displacees.
Assumptions:
· One updated version of the relocation plan and appeals process will be prepared.
· CITY will have sufficient funding to pay for the relocation of any parcel assigned.
· All relocation forms will be approved by the CITY prior to their use.
· There will be a maximum of one (1) Landlord business and three (3) residential relocations.
· There will be a maximum of one (1) Personal Property only (PPO)
· All relocation services will follow the Uniform Relocation Act and WSDOT LAG manual standards.
Deliverables:
· Updated Relocation plan
· Relocation appeals process.
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 14 of 15
· Relocation Documents.
· Relocation Services.
· Administer appeals and provide one appeals board member if needed.
· Completed files.
PREPARE RIGHT OF WAY CERTIFICATION PACKAGE
CONSULTANT shall work with the CITY and WSDOT Local Agency Coordinator (LAC) to prepare all files for
certification to the standards of the WSDOT LAG manual and prepare a certification memo for CITY.
· Prepare acquisition files and documents for pre-acquisition review by WSDOT.
· Attend the WSDOT pre-acquisition review meeting.
· Prepare post-acquisition files for certification.
· Prepare Draft Certification Memo.
· Participate in WSDOT LPA certification review.
CITY Responsibilities
· CITY shall supply all WSDOT LAC ROW documentation needed for parcel files to CONSULTANT in
advance of all WSDOT reviews.
· If WSDOT LAC ROW documentation is unavailable, the CITY agrees to facilitate and attend a
coordination meeting with the WSDOT LAC upon completion of NEPA and prior to the start of
acquisition activities.
· Review files prior to pre- and post-acquisition certification WSDOT review.
· Review and approve draft certification memo.
· Transmit final certification memo(s) to WSDOT LAC.
· Participate in WSDOT LPA certification review.
Assumption(s)
· A maximum of eighty-three (83) acquisition files shall be prepared for certification.
· There will be a maximum of one draft certification memo prepared.
· There will be a maximum of one certification review meeting of a maximum of two (2) hours duration
each for pre-acquisition and post-acquisition file review.
Deliverables:
· Up to eighty-three (83) acquisition files prepared for certification.
Naval Avenue B&P Improvements | Exhibit A-1 Scope of Work HDR
Page 15 of 15
· Up to one (1) draft certification memo.
TASK 14. DESIGN SERVICES DURING ROW PHASE
This task will be utilized to provide known and unknown design tasks as they present themselves during ROW
phase negotiations. This work will include but not limited to structural design of retaining walls, modification
to property frontage and property access, landscaping associated with the cemetery frontage, modification to
sidewalk and ramp design if needed. The fee estimate accounts for assumed design, scope and fee will be
provided as task present themselves for approval prior to commencement of work.
CITY Responsibilities
· Provide CONSULTANT with directive approval to complete work under this task.
Assumption(s)
· CONSULTANT and CITY will mutually agree to timeline durations and budget for work completed
under this task order prior to work beginning.
· To streamline delivery additional work will be requested and approved in writing via email.
· The CONSULTANT to incorporate changes into the final design of the project.
Deliverables:
· To be determined as each project change is enacted.
TASK 15. MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND
A Management Reserved Fund (MRF) $70,000, roughly 5%, is to be utilized only for unforeseen added work
that is not included in this AGREEMENT. This amendment adds additional funds to the MRF to account for
these unforeseen items.
The CONSULTANT shall obtain written authorization from the AGENCY prior to doing any work under MRF
through the city’s Management Reserve Authorization form. CONSULTANT compensation for work done
under MRF must be approved by the AGENCY prior to doing the work.
LABOR ESTIMATE, HDR ENGINEERING STAFFCity of Bremerton: Navel Ave Pedestrian and Bicycle EnhancementsAcevedo, Robert CBush, Jaelen AlexanderFrench, Cameron CParenteau, Trevor MichaelRoderick, Andy PPauly, Sarah CElder, Bailie DawnGould, Paul FPfiester, Benjamin AWillis, Lynn KNapiorkowski, Tomasz William (Tom)Barney, Hayley LynnKhinvasara, Saurabh SachinVo, John-Viet TFrankel, Isabelle GraceGurrad, Matthew CTotal Project RoleProject Manager/Traffic LeadEIT SanitaryRoadway / Water EngineerCAD Technician Real Estate ManagerROW Admin RES Agent 1 ROW Specialest ROW Tech RES Agent Sr Traffic Designer Project Accountant Structural EIT Structural Engineer Civil EIT Landscaping LeadLabor HoursTotal Labor DollarsBilling Rate286.40 128.58 187.05 114.87 233.96 134.78 112.95 193.99 121.16 159.05 164.16 120.69 130.36 254.38 130.79 207.281173000000000301080000311 67,506.52$ Project Setup64102,201.16$ Project Mgmt Plan / Quality Mgmt Plan / HASP 4481,628.36$ Coordination and Monitoring 606017,184.00$ Invoicing / Status Reporting / EV / WorkPlan 307210217,281.68$ Subconsultant Management 2420449,287.40$ Project Closeout48122,111.12$ Meetings and prep45307517,812.80$ 84000000000220000026 4,757.12$ 15th Street Signal Warrant Analysis 422264,757.12$ 12344022400000002200001800536 83,248.10$ Civil 12 20180 180 39258,825.20$ Stormwater 2 4022208412,128.50$ Utilities Coordination1232448,689.92$ Traffic 88163,604.48$ 2020-2024 Escalation0-$ 1300007351037 1070 286 1150 10400000005318 792,811.10$ 13.1.1 Project file setup10 110 20032039,755.40$ 13.1.2 Title Reports and Title Reviews5 15516022,060.70$ 13.1.3 Right of Entry documents10 10 10 10406,028.50$ 13.2.1 Relocation Plan Update416203,642.96$ 13.3.1 Project reports10 30406,383.00$ 13.3.2 Coordinating and monitoring80 4012024,108.00$ 13.3.3 Attend meeting40 84810,436.64$ 13.3.4 Project closeout and QC10 20021029,295.60$ 13.4.1 Manage delivery of AOS and appraisals10 10 406010,049.40$ 13.5.1 Acquisition and Negotiations - Document Prep10 250 5031045,734.10$ 13.5.2 Acquisition and Negotiations - negotiations500 700 800 7602760413,851.00$ 13.5.3 Acquisition and Negotiations - Agreement processing10 40 40 40 4017023,457.20$ 13.5.4 Agreement processing - File management and Transmittal100 6016020,255.00$ 13.6.1 Relocation Services - Support 160 300 20066099,196.40$ 13.6.2 Relocation Services - PPO60 208010,656.80$ 13.6.3 Relocation Services - File management and Transmittal40 408013,150.80$ 13.7.1 ROW Certification Package - Prepare files for certification by WSDOT40 408014,749.60$ 1480062000000220020080160100830133,605.14$ Ped Ramp design 21880 80 18026,236.46$ Driveway Ramp design 224120 80 22633,492.08$ Structural Wall Design 21216 200 80 31051,000.20$ Landscaping 284100 11422,876.40$ Task Total Hours 219.00 40.00 22.00 102.00 735.00 1037.00 1070.00 286.00 1150.00 1040.00 492.00 108.00 200.00 80.00 340.00 100.00 7021.00Task Total Fee 62,721.60$ 5,143.20$ 4,115.10$ 11,716.74$ 171,960.60$ 139,766.86$ 120,856.50$ 55,481.14$ 139,334.00$ 165,412.00$ 80,766.72$ 13,034.52$ 26,072.00$ 20,350.40$ 44,468.60$ 20,728.00$ 1,081,927.98$ Project Management & AdministrationTraffic AnalysisFinal Design - PS&EReal Estate ServicesDesign Services During ROW Phase c:\pwworking\west01\d3785060\Bremerton Naval Bike Ped Improv_Amendment 4_ESTIMATE.xlsmPrinted 9/24/20242:42 PM
EXPENSESCity of Bremerton: Navel Ave Pedestrian and Bicycle EnhancementsMileage/mile (IRS starting 7/1/22)Copies/Page 11x17 B&WCopies/Page 11x17 ColorCopies/Page 8.5x11 B&WCopies/Page 8.5x11 ColorExpress Mail MiscellaneousTravel Office Expenses Office Expenses Office Expenses Office Expenses Office Expenses MiscellaneousOTHER DIRECT COSTSEach Each Each Each Each Each EachUnit Cost$0.625 $0.090 $0.900 $0.050 $0.450 $25.000 $10.000 $3.70 0.00% 0.00%8Quantity 2200000000.00Task Total$137.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00$0.00 $0.00 $137.50 $0.00$137.5012Quantity 2200000000.00Task Total$137.50 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00$0.00 $0.00 $137.50 $0.00$137.5013Quantity 5000 1000 700 12000 2000 80 80 0.00Task Total$3,125.00 $90.00 $630.00 $600.00 $900.00 $2,000.00 $800.00$0.00 $0.00 $8,145.00 $0.00$8,145.0014Quantity0.00Task Total$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00$0.00Total ODC 3,400.00$ 90.00$ 630.00$ 600.00$ 900.00$ 2,000.00$ 800.00$ -$ -$ 8,420.00$ -$ 8,420.00$ Real Estate ServicesDesign Services During ROW Phase ContingencyTech FeesTotal ODCODC MarkupTotal ODC + MarkupFinal Design - PS&ETraffic Analysisc:\pwworking\west01\d3785060\Bremerton Naval Bike Ped Improv_Amendment 4_ESTIMATE.xlsm
SUBCONSULTANTSCity of Bremerton: Navel Ave Pedestrian and Bicycle EnhancementsLingeman Valuation Duncan Appraisal DR Surveying PH Consulting IdaxSUBCONSULTANTS0.00%1Task Total$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00$0.00 $0.00$0.008Task Total$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,450.00$1,450.00 $0.00$1,450.0012Task Total$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $21,982.70 $0.00$21,982.70 $0.00$21,982.7013Task Total$119,400.00 $7,500.00 $46,620.00 $0.00 $0.00$173,520.00 $0.00$173,520.0014Task Total$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00$0.00 $0.00$0.00Total Subconsultants 119,400.00$ 7,500.00$ 46,620.00$ 21,982.70$ 1,450.00$ 196,952.70$ -$ 196,952.70$ Traffic AnalysisFinal Design - PS&EReal Estate ServicesDesign Services During ROW Phase Total SubconsultantsSub MarkupTotal Subconsultants + MarkupProject Management & Administrationc:\pwworking\west01\d3785060\Bremerton Naval Bike Ped Improv_Amendment 4_ESTIMATE.xlsm
FEE ESTIMATECity of Bremerton: Navel Ave Pedestrian and Bicycle EnhancementsTask # Task DescriptionTotal LaborTotal ExpensesTotal SubconsultantsTotal For ProposalTotal For Proposal1 Project Management & Administration$67,507 $0 $0$67,5078 Traffic Analysis$4,757 $138 $1,450$6,34512 Final Design - PS&E$83,248 $138 $21,983$105,36913 Real Estate Services$792,811 $8,145 $173,520$974,47614 Design Services During ROW Phase $133,605 $0 $0$133,605$1,081,928 $8,421 $196,953 $1,287,302 $070,000.00$ -$ 103,649.75$ -$ $1,460,952 -$ Management Reserve Fund2020-2024 Escalation - Task 12c:\pwworking\west01\d3785060\Bremerton Naval Bike Ped Improv_Amendment 4_ESTIMATE.xlsmPage 1
Naval Ave
Council Meeting
January 15, 2025
1st to 15th Bike& PedEnhancementProject
Vicki Grover, P.E. – PW&U Engineering Division – City Project Manager
PROJECT HISTORY
•WSDOT Bike Ped Grant 2018, Council Accepted $620K on August
7, 2019
•Start Design January2020
•1st Virtual Online Open House – 6-26-2020 – online survey open
and open house website (June 26th – July 10
th)
•SAG Meeting 1 – 10-5-2020
•SAG Meeting 2 – 11-5-2021
•2nd Online Open House and Webinar – 10-10-2022
•PSRC Grant Application for Phase 1 – July 2021
•PSRC Grant Application for Phase 2 –July 2023
•PSRC Grant for Phase 1 Awarded – March 2022
Council Accepted $1.6M Phase 1 on June 15, 2022
Council Accepted $700K Phase 2 on December 20, 2023
•SEPA Approval 12/15/2023
•NEPA Approval 03/25/2024
Design Dates
•30% Design June 2020
•60% Design Sept. 2021
•90% Design April 2024
Estimated Schedule
•ROW Acquisition 2025 - 2026
•Go out to Bid – 12/2026
•Construction – 2027 2028
Next Step –ROW Acquisition
This Contract Modification #4 covers time and expenses for the Right-of-Way (ROW) acquisition phase,
including project management, ROW acquisition support, design adjustments from ROW changes, and grant
support.
Tasks Include:
•Pre-Acquisition and Data Management: Title reports, ROE agreements, and initial data collection.
•Management and Administration of ROW Process: Coordination, reporting, and QA/QC of ROW tasks.
•Valuation Process: AOS, appraisals, and parcel documentation for up to 83 parcels.
•Acquisition and Negotiation Services: Offer preparation, negotiations, and parcel acquisitions.
•Relocation Services: Relocation planning, execution, and appeals for affected parties.
•Right-of-Way Certification: Certification file preparation and WSDOT compliance.
ROW Needs
Permanent Acquisition (FEE) –39 Parcels 224,709 S.F.
Temporary Construction Easement (TCE) –79 Parcels 26,333 S.F.
Total of 83 unique parcels
Contract Cost
$1,460,952
Project Risks & Constraints
•WSDOT requires continuous progress.
•Redesign will pause the ROW process and
further design scope is unfunded.
•Pause in the ROW phase puts current
funding at risk.
Questions / Discussion
6 TH STREET
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING
JANUARY 21, 2025
Active Transportation Improvement Project
Nick Ataie, P.E. – PW&U Engineering Division
REVIEW OF JANUARY 8 STUDY SESSION
Understood Consensus Regarding Bike Lane Protection / Separation
Only Specific Locations as Presented at November Open House (Staff Recommendation)
Corridor-Wide Strategy / “As much as possible” / Budget Conscious
Notes: Flexible Posts are not “hard” protection. No opportunity for separation in many areas. Effective bike lane
width would be reduced if placing flexible posts inside non-buffered bike lane.
Pending Consensus Regarding Eastbound Right-Turn Lane at Naval Ave
Provide EB Right-Turn with NACTO “Combined” Lane Design (Staff Recommendation)
Do not provide EB Right-Turn - Shared Thru/Right with Buffered Bike Lane
SEPARATE RIGHT-TURN LANES
Safety-Focused Need, Purpose, and Evaluation
NEED: 2020 Bremerton Strategic Road Safety Plan
•“Rear-end” and “Angle” accidents accounted for
the highest number of crash types on 6th Street .
•Vast majority of crashes occurred at intersections.
PURPOSE: FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures (Intersections)
•Dedicated vehicle right-turn lanes shown to reduce total crashes by 14-26%
•Should be considered where significant turning volumes exist or high crash history
EVALUATION: Traffic Counts, Traffic Modeling, and Design Guidance
•WSDOT Guidance – Consider at 9 Locations / 7 Intersections
•Detailed Staff Evaluation – Provide at 2 Locations / 2 Intersections
NAVAL AVENUE INTERSECTION
Traffic Volume Information
NAVAL AVENUE INTERSECTION
Existing Condition
NAVAL AVENUE INTERSECTION
Combined Eastbound Right-Turn Lane
NAVAL AVENUE INTERSECTION
Combined Eastbound Right-Turn Lane – Concept Refinement
NAVAL AVENUE INTERSECTION
No Eastbound Right-Turn Lane
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
NCHRP REPORT – REDUCING CONFLICTS AT INTERSECTIONS
“Mixing Zone”“Separated Bike Lane”
Recommended if right-turn
volumes are high and no
other ability to reallocate
space to provide a right-turn
lane with bike separation
•Lower crash rate
•Mitigate speed at conflict points
to reduce potential severity of
crashes in mixing zone
•Higher crash rate
•Intersection safety worse than
protected intersection as
volume of right-turning motorist
increase.
NICK ATAIE, PE
PROJECT MANAGER – ENGINEERING
NICK.ATAIE@CI.BREMERTON.WA.US
360-473-2306
QUESTIONS & DISCUSSION
www.bremertonwa.gov/404/Projects
6th Street Active Transportation Improvement Project
Naval Avenue Alternatives to
Address Community Concerns
Bremerton Public Works Committee Meeting
January 21, 2025
Community Concerns
•Community appreciates all the progress made on project so far, but is asking
for a more up-to-date and safe design that eliminates mixing zones, provides
some measure of separation/protection for bike lanes, and further protects
pedestrians.
•This also aligns with the grant application project and need: "Project purpose
is to employ multimodal safety countermeasures/improvements for
pedestrians and bicyclists. Need is to reduce collisions and severities caused
by vehicle speeds with pedestrians and bicyclists with a project that will
increase the number of people who choose to walk and bike for
transportation."
Traffic Impacts
•Heard concerns from staff and other stakeholders on increased car queuing
if right turn lanes are eliminated.
•JCTP identifies this as a project that is designed for safety, multimodal, and
livability, but not base accessibility.
•JCTP also states regarding Naval Ave project, "Vehicle input at the NBK-BR
Naval gate may cause queueing on Naval Ave that could cause congestion in
the AM peak hour (5:30am to 6:30am). Queueing outside of the AM peak
hour is not anticipated.The City believes the overall benefits of the project
outweigh this risk."
Definitions
•NACTO: "Protected (Separated) Bike Lane: A type of bikeway that is physically
separated from motor vehicle traffic and distinct from the sidewalk. Protected bike
lanes provide space exclusively for bicyclists and are protected from vehicle traffic by
vertical elements such as flexible posts, curbs, planters, parked cars, or a combination
of these features."
•5 feet is the minimum width for a one-way protected (separated)bike lane.
•3 feet is the minimum width for the protective buffer separating the bike lane
from motor vehicle traffic or parking.
•This NACTO standard is adopted and supported by WSDOT and PSRC.
•NACTO also explicitly discourages mixing zones, recommending to "Avoid the use
of mixing zones or restrict turns where turn volumes are likely to make bicyclists
feel unsafe."
Two Alternatives to Move Foward
•Decided to focus on south side of Naval and 11th as example.
•Both alternatives follow NACTO guidelines/standards and allowed by
MUTCD.
•Both shorten the time/distance a pedestrian spends in front of vehicles.
•Both increase road lanes from 1 to 2 at intersection (instead of 3).
•Neither require changing the currently planned right-of-way or sidewalks,
and utilize existing bike detection/signal plans.
•Option A: Maintains right turn pocket, eliminates mixing zone,and
provides a separated/protected bike lane.
•Option B: Eliminates right turn pocket,eliminates mixing zone, and
provides a separated/protected bike lane.
Current: Conflict Zone, No Separated Lane, w/ Right Turn Pocket
Option A: No Conflict Zone, Separated Lane, w/ Right Turn Pocket
Option B: No Conflict Zone, Separated Lane, No Right Turn Pocket
Next Steps and Questions
•How do we work together to move Option A or Option B forward
and address community concerns?
•Can we replicate this at NW corner of Burwell and Naval and
SE corner of 6th and Naval?
•Right turn pockets here are not used for AM NBK traffic (JCTP).
•What is the added design cost to implement at this stage?
•6th and Naval can come out of 6th Street Design funds.
City of Bremerton
Naval Avenue – 1st Street to 15th Street Pedestrian and Bicycle
Enhancements Project [HLP-PB19(006)]
Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG)
Meeting Minutes
October 5th, 2020
10:00 am to 12:00 pm
Attendees
Robert Acevedo (HDR), Allison Satter (COB), Cameron French (HDR), Chris Dimmit (COB),
Dianne Iverson (Bicycle Group), Dennis Engeld (WSDOT), Lynn Wall (NBK), Marco Dicicco
(School District), Michael Goodnow (COB), Ned Lever (COB), Shane Weber (COB), Steffani Lillie
(Kitsap Transit), Tom Knuckey (COB), Jake Pi (HDR), Greg Wheeler (Mayor)
Those invited but not in attendance: Allison O’Sullivan (Suquamish Tribe), Denis Frey (Bremerton
Chamber of Commerce), Megan Moore (Kitsap Community Health), Mike Davis (Bremerton PD), Mike
Six (Bremerton Fire)
AGENDA ITEMS
1. Welcome
a. Robert went over the presentation platform and discussed tools and format.
2. Introductions
a. Chris introduced the project and Robert conducted role call with individual s
giving a brief introduction.
3.Project Overview and Status
a. Scope and Grant requirements
i. Chris discuss the scope of the design effort based on the received design
only grant.
b. Current Status of Project
i. Chris stated that the project had worked through 30% design,
determined a phased approach for delivering the corridor, conducted
initial public outreach with online open house, and submitted for a grant
to fund phase 1 of the project.
4. Robert presented the design overview for the corridor and the individual segments as
the have currently been developed.
a. 15th to 11th St
i. Shared use facility with new sidewalks. This portion as there is limited
ROW and already only two lanes is not a road diet.
ii. ADA and signal improvements a 15th Street Intersection
iii. Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing at 13th
iv. Improvements to 11th Street Signalized intersection, plan is to widen to
provide bicycle and ADA facilities through the intersection
b. 11th to 6th St
i. Repurposing the outside travel lanes for wider sidewalks and bike lanes
ii. Enhanced Pedestrian crossings at 8th and 10th – Including new ped ramps,
singing and striping and RRFBs
iii. The school district has expressed interest in converting adjacent streets
to one way roads to help access and circulation around the school.
Potential for conversion of 8th and 10th to one way roads adjacent the
school. (conditional to City Council approval)
c. 6th to 1st St
i. Repurposing the outside travel lanes for wider sidewalks and bike lanes
ii. Alternatives at Burwell Intersection. Signal or Roundabout
1. Roundabout operates better for traffic and provide opportunity
for a design wayfinding feature
iii. Bicycle and pedestrian connection to 1st street
iv. Speed hump for pedestrian crossings away from the Gate entrance.
Discuss sign feature
5. Top Priorities of SAG (Meeting opened up for discussion and feedback.)
a. Is there anything that we should be aware of? Coordination with adjacent
projects or changes stakeholders are anticipating.
i. No major concerns brought forth
b. Open Discussion about design to identify SAG concerns and requests.
i. Allison: 8th Street you’ll want crosswalk on north end, which is where
everyone crosses.
ii. Marco: Considering a conversion to one way moving the crosswalk to the
south looks good.
iii. Ned: Need clarification of justification for crosswalk on south side. Asked
about turn templates at 8th and 10th. Asked about sidewalks extending on
13th.
1. Discussed the addition of sidewalks on 13th to connect to existing
infrastructure. Turn templates had been looked at for 8th street
intersection but would need to be looked at on 10th if the one way
conversion is carried forward.
iv. Dianne: North of 11th street, sidewalk is not very safe right now and does
not accommodate for wheelchairs. Are these being widened? Might be
better to make wider and nicer sidewalk on one side of the street.
1. Discussion followed about wider sidewalks on one side of the
road and ADA minimum on the other. Lebo and Lower Warren
were mentioned as examples. The challenge of negotiating what
side of the street with properties owners was discussed.
v. Tom: If the shipyard creates the delay, how will traffic get handled
1. Discussion of queuing to 6th as the worst case condition and the
processing rate of the gate being the influencing factor.
2. Discussed overview of gate operation improvements that were
covered in previous meeting. Increase processing rate by multiple
check people, diversion of some personnel to other entrances for
example.
vi. Dianne: asked what happens to roundabout when there is a backup.
Opposes roundabout option, prefers ped/bike friendly
1. Discussion about roundabout failure and potential blockage and
queuing along Burwell and Naval if traffic was to back up from the
gate.
vii. Steffani: opposes roundabout, challenges on bus pull-out and blocking
the traffic when an east/west traveling bus pulls through and takes a lane
of traffic to service the stop.
viii. Michael: agree with Dianne on roundabout being contradictory to City’s
goal of ped friendly. In regards to NBK gate, north-south traffic might
impede east-west traffic. Asked about what’s the plan for the bicycle
infrastructure on 1st.
1. Discussion of the improvements considered as part of the City’s
none motorized plan. Naval Ave improvements would have to be
forward compatible with those improvements which will be
implemented later.
ix. Marco: how does bike lane affect school bus route and pickup location?
There is a 7:26 am pickup for middle school.
1. Discussion of bus stop location and future coordination with
design. Understanding of the earliest bus scheduled stop time and
most likely outside of the peak gate ingress time.
x. Lynn (chat): As a follow-on to Council member Goodnow's questions.
NBK has had many requests and proposals over the years from the
bicycle community to provide better access both to the base and beyond.
The 1st Street bike path is preferred by the bike community due to
topography and relatively low traffic. Other routes are relatively steep or
on busy streets. Our primary concern in the past is treating the area
where that bike route would cross Naval gate to reduce bike vs car
accidents. This path is part of a needed corridor connector to improve
bike access through the City not just to NBK.
xi. Tom: asked how the bicyclists currently go through the gate.
1. Lynn confirmed they either go through the turnstile or use the
vehicle gate.
xii. Dianne: have we considered wider sidewalk at the corner at 1st?
Recommend having shared bike use with the vehicles.
xiii. Greg: appreciate everyone’s work. Please consider future of the City in
terms of accommodating more modes of transportation given the
ongoing growth of the region.
xiv. Dennis: ICE process will need to be followed for the Burwell Intersection.
1. Discussion of the City modeling and the understanding that there
will be a concurrency issue if traffic growth continues as it is
currently projected. Understanding the ICE process the city built
the analysis of a roundabout into the scope of this project.
Moving forward with the preferred alternative the City will
provide the proper WSDOT project documentation.
c. Buffered Bike Lanes
i. Michael: what about raising the bike lane elevation to match with the
sidewalk, rather than with the road. Dianne answered it works very well.
1. Discussion followed about the benefits and challenges of this
treatment. Has the potential to create a sense of separation with
less horizontal displacement. Challenges are they are more
difficult to keep clean and free of debris, may add to the amount
of side street and driveway improvements needed as the raised
elevation will have to be chased more to tie into existing grade,
and require wider footprint at intersections to accommodate
mixing zones.
ii. Tom: given the businesses south of 5th, may need wider sidewalk
between 5th and 6th.
iii. Dianne: 10 feet sidewalk one side and narrower on the opposite side
works well.
iv. Michael: what’s the driving factor for doing/not doing raised crosswalks
at side streets?
1. Discussion of cost and additional improvements off corridor that
may be required. Wil look into potential for additional locations.
v. Ned: observed the queues back to 6th at about 7:15 am.
d. Bike Boxes
i. Dianne: bike boxes at any location provide sense of safety, but especially
recommend them at 6th because many bicyclists use 6th corridor to travel
east-west.
ii. Marco: 10’ sidewalk north of 11th would be good for student pickups at
that location.
6. Chris discussed the project next steps
a. Advancing design to 60% Design level
b. Next SAG Meeting After 60% submittal
c. Following the SAG meeting we will have a follow up Public Outreach effort
City of Bremerton
Naval Avenue – 1st Street to 15 th Street Pedestrian and Bicycle
Enhancements Project [HLP-PB19(006)]
Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG)
Minutes
November 5th, 2021
10:00 am to 12:00 pm
Attendees
Robert Acevedo (HDR), Allison Satter (NBK), Cameron French (HDR), Chris Dimmit (COB),
Garrett Jackson (COB), Dianne Iverson (Bicycle Group), Dennis Engel (WSDOT), Andrew Larson
(WSDOT), Marco Dicicco (School District), Ned Lever (COB), Shane Weber (COB), Dana Bierman
(KCHD), Kathleen Barnhart (Suquamish Tribe), Tom Knuckey (COB), Greg Wheeler (Mayor)
Those invited but not in attendance: Michael Goodnow (COB), Steffani Lillie (Kitsap Transit), Allison
O’Sullivan (Suquamish Tribe), Denis Frey (Bremerton Chamber of Commerce), Megan Moore (Kitsap
Community Health), Mike Davis (Bremerton PD), Mike Six (Bremerton Fire)
AGENDA ITEMS
1. Welcome
a. Chris Dimmitt introduced the meeting agenda, provided an verbal outline of the
discussion, and format.
2. Introductions
a. Chris conducted role call with individuals giving a brief introduction.
3. Project Overview and Status
a. Current Status of Project
i. Chris stated that the project had selected a single corridor concept to
advance up to 60% design completion, conducted initial public outreach
with online open house, and is actively pursuing grant funding for
subsequent project phases (i.e. ROW and Construction).
b. Review of feedback received from last meeting
i. Items not carried forward from 30% Design.
1. From the last SAG meeting (10/5/20) Chris states that the
following items were not carried forward due to comment from
the SAG/public or from other constraints:
a. No Roundabout for this project
b. No buffered bike lanes
c. No raised/combined bike lane with sidewalk
ii. Changes carried forward to 60% design since last SAG meeting –
discussed.
1. Singular project layout versus multiple
2. Addition of RRFBs at 13th,10th, 8th, and 4th Streets
3. Interface of bike lane/shared use path and Naval Ave Gate
4. Addition of Bike Boxes and bike conflict ladders
c. Scope and Grant requirements
i. Chris restated the scope of the design effort based on the received design
only grant. This project must contain design improvements for
multimodal travel (bikes and pedestrian), be ADA compliant, and improve
overall safety on the corridor for all modes.
4. Preliminary design review of each segment
a. 15th to 11th St
i. Chris highlighted ROW acquisitions at 11th St that will make the overall
intersection safer.
ii. 15th St signal warrant (Tom). To evaluate. Marco indicated there are a lot
of students that cross the roadway at this location.
iii. Signing necessary for chicane at 13th St (Shane)
b. 11th to 6th St
i. Discussion on percentage/number of students that walk and bike to
Naval Ave elementary. 150/300 are within walk zone (Marco)
ii. Discussion on increasing west sidewalk with with ROW acquisition for
congregation area.
iii. Re-mentioned the projects desire to have a couplet for 8th and 10th
Streets in cooperation with Bremerton School District
c. 6th to 1st St
i. 1St St and Naval Ave transition – west side of street
1. Both Allison Satter and Dianne Iverson were happy with the
progress of the design to this point. No additional comments were
received regarding this part of the project.
ii. Kiss and Stop parking on Gregory Way – PSNS request
1. Shane, Tom, and Marco all had reservations regarding the Navy’s
request for a Kiss and Stop parking area on Gregory Way. Tom
stated he would pass this request to Katie Ketterer to include in
the Joint Compatibility Study for NBK.
5. Top Priorities of SAG
a. Open Discussion
i. Discussed curb ramp styles and reasoning behind design. Received
feedback to not design curb ramps such as those on the Manette Bridge
roundabout curb cuts.
1. Tom also mentioned that the use of directional ramps versus bi-
sector ramps would be preferred as the ADA community has
expressed concern for those visually impaired and potentially
directing them away from the crosswalk areas.
ii. Marco mentioned that the Naval Avenue Learning plan is to construct a
new K-5 school wit increase in population sometime in the distant future.
1. Shane mentioned the possibility of looking into a congregating
area along Naval Ave between 8th and 10th. This would require
ROW acquisition to make extra wide sidewalk area but Marco
indicated the school district could be open to that improvement.
iii. Discussed RRFB crossing location at 4th St.
1. Dianne Iverson suggested looking into separate bike crossing as
the current location seems a bit far from where cyclists cross
Naval Ave going westbound.
iv. Andrew Larson brought up the maintenance agreement for green
pavement markings across Burwell St (SR 304). Shane mentions that the
City of Bremerton maintains all markings on city streets and would do the
same here.
v. Discussed limitation of roadway cross section from 11th to 15th
vi. Action Item:
1. Sending Allison traffic analysis for gate queue and previous
correspondence with Lynn Wall
vii. Marco’s issue with bus route on Gregory Way. The current bus route
travels west along Gregory and then south on Naval in order to continue
west on 1st St. Marco was concerned with having additional parking areas
too close to the intersection, making it more difficult to maneuver a
school bus along this route. Designer to look into options for mitigation.
6. Next Steps
a. Online Open House for 60% Design – Q1 of 2022
i. Follow up Public Outreach
b. Advance design to 90% Design level – Q3 of 2022
c. Stakeholder meeting after 90% Design completed – Q3 of 2022
d. Obtain Right of Way and Construction Funding - TBD
Published for
January 8
Study Session
Item B6
Public Comments
From: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2024 9:56 AM
To: cory.derenburger@gmail.com
Cc: Vicki Grover <Vicki.Grover@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Ned Lever <Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us>;
Shane Weber <Shane.Weber@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey
<Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Public Works & Utilities Customer Response
<bremerton1@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Gunnar Fridriksson <Gunnar.Fridriksson@ci.bremerton.wa.us>;
City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: RE: Naval and 6th Street Projects Question
Cory,
Thank you for the thoughtful and detailed email. As you’re probably aware, use of bicycle signal
indications is highly dependent upon several factors including intersection configuration,
vehicle/bike volumes, peak hour turning volumes, and intersection operational requirements, and
studies which would warrant separating bicycle movement from vehicle movements. If you’re
interested, there is some new guidance related to bike signals in the Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices, 11th Edition, Part 4 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/11th_Edition/part4.pdf).
To date for the 6th Street project, we have not excluded bike signalization from consideration on the
project, but further evaluation would be required based on identification on a preferred corridor
layout. Additionally, as previously communicated on the project, we are seeking to deliver a
balanced and cost-conscious project which is currently budget constrained. Some project
elements could potentially be evaluated, recommended, and phased-in at a later date under a
separate project. At a minimum we would be making signal timing and detection adjustments
which considers the new on-street bicycle facilities and will also be looking at opportunities to
improve safety for pedestrians.
I appreciate the reference to NACTO’s dedicated intersection especially given its implementation
requires less space than a fully protected intersection – I will ensure this is included along with
other comments and suggestions provided as we work towards a viable preferred project
alternative. If you are not aware, there will be some initial discussion this afternoon at the Public
Works Committee meeting (https://www.bremertonwa.gov/Calendar.aspx?EID=3298) related to
multimodal level of service policy. While not directly related to the 6th Street project, any potential
new or updated policies related to multimodal transportation could more clearly inform active
transportation project development including the magnitude and type(s) of improvement. Once
such example of this for bicyclist is defining a methodology for Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (BLTS)
which could be granular enough to differentiate intersection configurations such as the dedicated
intersection presented by NACTO.
Vicki Grover, copied on this email, may follow-up with more specifics related to the Naval project
as well.
Sincerely,
Nick Ataie, P.E., Project Manager - Transportation
City of Bremerton Engineering Division
Direct 360.473.2306 | Cell 564.222.0897
From: Cory Derenburger <cory.derenburger@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2024 9:38 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey
<Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval and 6th Street Projects Question
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Good evening,
I had a question about if there are any plans for bike signals in these projects? The
overview on the Naval project seems to allude to this, but I don't see much in the FAQ
about signal improvements on the 6th street project. The 6th Street plan from what I see
only shows the bike signal at Washington (which I do like heading south into the
sharrow). If there are plans for bike signals and detectors, generally what kind?
I will continue to advocate for a protected intersection and 6th and Naval, but even if we
cannot have a protected intersection there due to space or other considerations, can we
employ at a minimum the elements outlined in NACTO
Dedicated Intersections https://nacto.org/publication/dont-give-up-at-the-
intersection/dedicated-intersections/
Protected elements are more limited in this intersection design than a protected bike
intersection. It includes elements such as phased bike signaling, set back stop bar for
vehicles, and speed humps.
"Signals: Using a combination of a leading bike signal phase or interval, and setting back
the stop bar for motor vehicles, people on bikes get a head start before cars start turning. A
Leading Bike + Pedestrian Interval (LBI) can be provided if a shared through/turn lane is
next to the bikeway. If a dedicated right or left turn lane is next to the bikeway, protected-
permissive bike signal phasing should be considered.25 Protected signal phases should be
considered if turn volumes from the adjacent lane exceed 120 to 150 vph. Protected signal
phases should also be considered if conflicting left turn volumes (on two-way streets)
across the bikeway exceed 60 to 90 vph, or if these turns cross multiple traffic lanes."
I do not like turn pockets, please keep cyclists separated on the side in our own lane. This
helps with predictability for both motor vehicles and cyclists, and would go a long way to
reducing friction between road users and unsafe mixing at turn pockets.
*as a bonus the curb also gives us a foot rest at intersections, and helps us get moving
faster
If not in the plan, please consider adding bike signals and detectors, in addition to vehicle
setbacks from Dedicated Intersections.
I don't know the vph, but bike signals along 6th and Naval could make things safer for
cyclists, and I think drivers would benefit by knowing what is expected at each
intersection. Let's not make drivers and cyclists on these busy streets guess what the
other will do negotiating a merge or crossing an intersection, let's have the infrastructure
manage these interactions for all users and keep everyone safer.
Thank you,
Cory Derenburger
Bremerton
From: Heather Diane Pugh <pughhd@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 5, 2025 9:35 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg Wheeler
<Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey <Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval Avenue Project
Hi all,
Bremerton residents, myself included, want safer streets for non-car travel. This desire
is growing and now is the time to shift our focus. As I have expressed before, moving
cars in and out of Bremerton at greater speeds certainly benefits shipyard traffic but it
ignores what residents actually want - a safer place for live and recreate.
For example, I walk the Manette bridge often and the current car traffic priority (the new
roundabout on the west side) means less safety for everyone else moving about the
city. Increased speeds/reduced visibility for drivers entering the roundabout means it
can be challenging to cross the street by foot. Not only that, bike safety has now been
compromised. We can do better! And the Naval Ave project is our opportunity.
Other cities are planning for the future with a focus on public transit, completely
protected bike lanes, narrower roads, more trees, reduced parking lots, and we’ll even
see tolls for inner city driving (NYC would be the first of its kind in the US).
This letter is to ask that we employ creative planning that increases safety and livability
for Bremerton residents. Not only that, but build/rebuild roads for future growth that
encourage (and even force) reduced car travel.
Thanks for the opportunity to share my thoughts.
Heather Pugh
From: dianne iverson <diverson1950@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 5, 2025 10:13 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jane Rebelowski
<Jane.Rebelowski@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.L.Coughlin@gmail.com>; Eric Younger
<eric.younger@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jennifer Chamberlin <Jennifer.Chamberlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>;
Michael Goodnow <Michael.Goodnow@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Anna Mockler
<Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Denise Frey <Denise.Frey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval Avenue: Safety for all users makes a more livable city
Photo taken by Dianne Iverson in Victoria, BC in February 2024. Two individuals using
wheelchairs on a protected bike lane in Victoria, British Columbia.
To: Council President Younger and members of the City Council,
Re: Naval Avenue multimodal improvements need to be safer:
In 2019 as a member of the Naval Avenue Stakeholders Committee I proposed protected
bike lanes for Naval Avenue. A couple of weeks ago, I forwarded to you my original concept
that was presented to staff back in 2019 as a member of the committee. At that time, staff
was against protection for cyclists. My proposal for Naval Avenue protected bike lanes was
dismissed by staff. The issue has re-sufaced because more Bremerton families with
children are advocating for safer streets. Protection means a safer street for walkers,
bikers, and individuals who use wheelchairs.
Livability has been a term that has been used to describe your vision for Bremerton. I have
heard the Mayor and the Council publicly state that you all support livability. But what
does it mean to you? What does it mean to those of us who choose to live here? What
does it mean for families, for the elderly, for the disabled?
As a 74 year old resident of Bremerton who walks with a cane, bikes on a recumbent trike,
and uses a wheelchair, I too, am a believer in making Bremerton more livable. We share
that vision. One of the most important infrastructure needs for the most vulnerable in our
population is transportation. How people get from one place to another is an essential part
of livability for many of us.
So what does this have to do with Naval Avenue? Everything. Our city, like all American
cities, has been focused for 70 years on how to move automobiles and freight. Now, it is
time to think about transportation in a different way. How do we move people as well as
cars and freight. We can do both. And it is important that we do both, if we are wanting to
improve livability for all of us who choose to live here. We can no longer just be a place
where we are a highway for commuters.
So what does Naval Avenue need that will improve safety? Build community. Build a more
livable city? Here's a short list that research shows is effective.
1. Protection between active transportation users and cars. Paint is not protection.
2. No right turn on red, which is becoming a standard in many cities already. Cars turning
right at intersections is a safety hazard for walkers, bikers, and people who use
wheelchairs.
3. No mixing zones when possible. Take a bike ride with me on Kitsap Way and you will
experience many mixing zones of cars and bikes. The most dangerous zone is at SR
3/Kitsap Way on-ramp to Silverdale. Mixing zones are dangerous, and I will not cycle Kitsap
Way after the sun goes down. It is just too dangerous.
4. Light signals that give pedestrians, cyclists, and individuals who use wheelchairs
preference to move through an intersection.
5. Narrower crosswalks to protect the most vulnerable. Wider crosswalks that
incorporate turn pockets are more dangerous for our most vulnerable users. That's why on
Kitsap Way a refuge island was built in front of Brother Don's.
Let's raise the standard for safety for all of us as we upgrade our streets
in Bremerton. Let's learn from other communities throughout Puget Sound and across the
nation. Good road design is an essential component to making a city more livable. Let's
learn from each other and start to have a meaningful discussion about how to make our
streets safer. The staff recommendation for Naval Avenue to council is not safe enough.
Let's do it right the first time.Bremerton residents deserve better.
Dianne Iverson
diverson1950@gmail.com
From: Reama Schuldt <reama.schuldt@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024 6:46 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Michael Goodnow <Michael.Goodnow@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Anna Mockler
<Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; The Schuldts <theschuldtfamily@gmail.com>; Jane Rebelowski
<Jane.Rebelowski@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Happy New Year!
Hi City Council!
I hope your year end comes smoothly and 2025 kicks off without a hitch. I truly
appreciate you giving so much of your time and energy to this city that I love!
I want to thank you for your care on the Naval Ave project. I have been very interested
in the project since the first online meeting to talk about it. I watched the study session
video from last week. Thank you to the council members that continue to get into the
details on this plan.
I am deeply concerned about the removal of street trees, both those on p rivate property
and the ones on public land, like the Naval Elem play field and by the cemetery.
I own a home at 7th and Naval. I consider my family the current stewards of a home
that has seen generations of babies grow and people move through the decad es of their
lives. Built in 1915, the home is iconic and MANY people have said they consider it the
cutest home in the neighborhood. Part of the charm is the 50+ year old cherry tree that
is iconic on that strip of street.
Regarding public land trees, the Naval Elementary play field trees provide sun shade,
habitat for local wildlife (I've seen the cutest raccoon babies up there!), and they mirror
the trees on the opposite side of the field. These trees must be preserved. The other
trees I am concerned about are the ones along the cemetery. Those trees shade the
sidewalk.
I looked through the plan and it is difficult to tell which trees will be altered. If it turns out
these trees will be unharmed, then great. If it is in the plan to "remove and replace"
these trees, as Public Works said at the study session, that is very alarming! There is
NO replacing the gorgeous growth along the cemetery and in the playfield. There is NO
replacing a 50+ year old ornamental cherry tree.
Removing decades-old trees and replacing them (if that actually would ever happen)
defeats the very purpose of the Naval Ave road redesign, which is to make a bicycle
and pedestrian arterial.
The last thing I want to note in this email is that after the 6th Street open house where
PubWorks had two long maps laid out with design and seemed open to feedback, I
hoped this was how things were going to move forward. I heard PubWorks say that the
60% plan has been on the city website since 2022. I've done my very best to stay on top
of this project and be informed on changes happening steps from my door. However, I
do not recall any public comment invited at the 60% stage. Can you please send me a
copy of the 60% plan that they referenced? It's no longer on the website, having
been replaced with the 90% plan.
Also, can you clarify what communication has gone out to residents along Naval
on land acquisition? I'm concerned for my neighbors at 11th and Naval that will be
displaced when their home is removed. I'm concerned for my neighbors at 15th and
Naval that will have their front yard used as a construction parking lot.
Thank you always for your work to serve the residents of Bremerton. It's seen,
appreciated, and so valuable!
Happy holidays!
Reama Schuldt
Home owner in Bremerton
Business owner in Bremerton
P.s. Santatizer? Nice one, Council Member Younger!!
From: Travis Merrigan <bikebremerton@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2024 1:40 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Anna Mockler
<Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jane Rebelowski <janerebelowski@yahoo.com>; Jennifer
Chamberlin <Jennifer.Chamberlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Denise Frey
<Denise.Frey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Michael Goodnow <Michael.Goodnow@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Eric
Younger <eric.younger@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval Ave Project - do not approve $1.46m right-of-way acquisitions
Dear City Council,
I write in regards to the “Naval Avenue 1st to 15th Bicycle and Pedestrian Enhancements
Project”. Despite some excellent components, the City’s recently released ‘90% Plan’ for Naval
Ave will make the street less safe and cost too much.
I urge Council to delay implementation of the plan - do not rubber stamp the Administration's
request to begin right-of-way acquisitions. Let's slow down, allow the the public and council to
review the plan and improve it.
The Good:
The Naval Project has a couple of excellent elements, including:
-- An end-to-end bike lane from 1st to 15th
-- Safe, narrowed intersections at the small street crossings: 10th, 8th, 5th and 4th
The Bad:
However, the Naval plan falls well short in several critical areas, including
-- Large intersections will be made less safe due to lengthened crosswalks and long turn radii
that increase car turning speeds
-- Bike lanes are unprotected and incorporate turn pockets, which make the bike lanes unsafe
for children and other humans
-- The plan is extraordinarily expensive, with 83 right-of-way acquisitions, wholesale
removal/replacement of all existing sidewalks and power poles and widening of Naval Ave.
-- Lack of transparency. The City held a single public meeting, online, on a week day, and over
2 years ago. Neither the public nor Council has had an opportunity to weigh in on this plan.
The Naval 90% Plan should not be accepted without in-depth deliberation from City Council. On
such an expensive project, it would be prudent to commission a review from an outside
contractor (not our regular HDR or Parametrix) to see where improvements can be made.
-----
I respectfully submit three types of improvement - three principals to consider - applicable to
Naval Ave:
First, focus on safety in intersections - Intersections are where soft humans and big
machines directly cross paths. Most car-on-car and most car-on-human collisions occur in
intersections. According to the US DOT, “roughly one–quarter of traffic fatalities and about one–
half of all traffic injuries in the United States are attributed to intersections.”
The 90% plan for Naval would create (maintain) dangerous intersections with high Level of
Traffic Stress (LTS) at the large intersections: Burwell/Naval, 6th/Naval and 11th/Naval.
Because these intersections incorporate large radius corners, the encourage cars to turn at high
speeds, and design lengthens the crosswalk from the current, not-particularly safe status quo.
And these intersections contain ‘turn pocket’ style bike lanes, which are not safe for school
children. NACTO has great info about safe intersections - https://nacto.org/publication/dont-
give-up-at-the-intersection/protected-intersections/
‘A protected intersection, NACTO publication: https://nacto.org/publication/dont-give-up-at-
the-intersection/protected-intersections/ ‘
Second, build safe, modern bike infrastructure. Proposed bike lanes will result in a high
LTS, due to lack of protection, high traffic counts, turn pockets, and unsafe intersections. A high
LTS virtually ensures that children won’t ride in the bike lane. Bremerton should never again
build a bike lane that children can’t ride in, especially not for Naval Ave, which passes through
school zones. ‘Paint-only bike lanes’ are not modern bike infrastructure, please don’t fund
unprotected bike lanes.
‘Unprotected bike lanes attract illegally parked cars.’
Third, be cost efficient. Bremerton has many streets in need of safety improvements,
repaving, new sidewalks, etc. We should be as efficiency as possible, spread the improvements
widely. WA State budgets will likely be tighter in the future, and who knows what’s coming out of
DC. No is a time for high efficiency.
The recent Manette Roundabout project cost $8.3m for a project 4-5 blocks long or $1.7-2.1m
per block. The costs were high because 100% of the street was ripped out and replaced. The
Naval 90% Plan is every bit as ambitious as the roundabout and it stretches for 15 blocks. The
plan envisions 37 right-of-way acquisitions (!!), it would tear out virtually every existing sidewalk
and require move dozens of power poles and stormwater drains.
There’s a more efficient way to move forward. Seattle has a program called ‘Even Better Bike
Lanes’ that simply place inexpensive concrete barriers between soft humans and metal
machines. This technique can be complete for tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of dollars
per block, not millions of dollars.
‘Even Better Bike Lane installation in Seattle.’
The City is committed to improvements on 6th and Naval. Great, let’s get them done efficiently.
Then let’s complete projects in the outlying areas, in every council district. Spread the money
widely and wisely. The City’s proposed plans for Naval and 6th Street don’t accomplish those
goals. Let’s do better.
Thanks,
Travis Merrigan
Bremerton
From: Travis Merrigan <bikebremerton@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 4, 2025 10:07 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Update BMC 11.12.070 Traffic Impact Mitigation
Happy new year.
I believe Bremerton Municipal Code - 11.12.070 TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION may be
inhibiting the construction of safe streets and requiring the construction of high-throughput
streets. The work need to be done quickly, because Public Works is declaring that it’s already
too late to have any effect on the safety elements of the Naval Ave street project.
Specifically, 11.12.070 states
(a) The City Engineer shall impose conditions necessary to mitigate all impacts of traffic,
circulation and parking resulting from a project… For segments… where the present LOS is
below the standard … the mitigation measure shall be sufficient in the estimation of the City
Engineer to maintain or exceed the present LOS. (full text link here.
In the Dec 17th Public Works Committee discussed their requirements for Level of Service
Naval Ave and 6th Street multimodal projects. On multiple occasions, Public Works officials
including the Director of PW and City Engineer, Ned Lever, stated that municipal code requires
PW to build only for car capacity, they have no responsibility to build safe streets.
In particular, the City Manager stated that he was required to maintain Level of Service - which
only measures rush-hour car backups. Quoting the City Engineer from Dec 17th, in response to
a question about removing turn pockets and making protected bike lanes, “We don’t have a
Level of Traffic Stress Policy, we only have a Level of service policy.” later he said “I think
engineering needs policy and standards that Council adopts. And so when all of these questions
come in about, why aren't [saying] why aren't you doing what Seattle's doing? Like, Bremerton
doesn't have an adopted standard…”
He continued: “I'd really like clarity about what you like when we comes to naval Ave… we need
to justify turn pockets because we're trying to maximize intersection, right?…. You're saying
you'd like to see bike lanes always on the curb line, but that's not our guidance right now, so.”
Public Works lacks guidance. They believe their job is fast rush-hour cars, not safe streets the
other 23 hours per day. does not believe safe streets are in their remit. That needs to change.
Here’s one part of the code that is currently weighted very heavily towards rush hour traffic.
Bremerton Municipal Code - 11.12.070 TRAFFIC IMPACT MITIGATION.
(a) The City Engineer shall impose conditions necessary to mitigate all impacts of traffic,
circulation and parking resulting from a project. For segments, intersections or other portions of
the street system for which a level of service (LOS) standard has been adopted within the
current comprehensive plan of the city, mitigation measures shall be sufficient, in the estimation
of the City Engineer, to assure that such segments, intersections or other portions of the street
system continue to meet or exceed the adopted LOS standards after full project occupancy and
operation. For segments, intersections or other portions of the street system for where the
present LOS is below the standard that has been adopted in the current comprehensive plan,
the mitigation measure shall be sufficient in the estimation of the City Engineer to maintain or
exceed the present LOS. . Mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to,
channelization; intersection modifications; signal installation, modification, or replacement;
installation of acceleration/deceleration lanes; turn lanes and medians.
Arguably, the Bremerton Municipal Code 11.10 Complete Streets contradicts the ‘rush-hour
only’ vision of streets. But Public Works doesn’t think so. So the City Council needs to act to
prevent more VERY UNSAFE PROJECTS - such as the Manette Roundabout - from being built.
Some examples of better city code:
But 2023 HB 1181, a major overhaul of the state’s Growth Management Act, replaces mentions
of “level of service” with “multimodal level of service.” It updated and improved RCW
36.70A.020.
… if the development causes the level of service on a locally owned or locally or
regionally operated transportation facility to decline below the standards… unless
transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development
are made concurrent with the development. These strategies may include ((increased))
active transportation facility improvements, increased or enhanced public transportation
service, ride-sharing programs,
It continues:
Priority must be given to inclusion of transportation facilities and services providing the
greatest multimodal safety benefit
In other words, LOS must be maintained UNLESS the project improves multimodal level of
service via improved pedestrian, cycling or transit improvements.
City of Bellingham measures not ‘Level of Service’ but ‘Multimodal Level of Service’ in its
Chapter 13.70 MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT.
Instead of just measuring how cars flow during the busiest time of day, they look at the capacity
for ‘person trips’. B. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a multimodal transportation
concurrency management program to ensure that adequate multimodal transportation capacity
in the form of “person trips” is available prior to, or concurrent with, final approval of
development permits.
Thank you for working to improve City Code.
Travis Merrigan
Bremerton
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 1:07 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg Wheeler
<Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: dianne iverson <diverson1950@gmail.com>; Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas
Knuckey <Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Level of Service, 6th St. and Naval Ave.
City Council and Mayor Wheeler,
You're scheduled to get updates on the 6th Street project shortly. Things I hope you
consider for this project and for Naval Avenue:
Level of Service:
You have the ability to choose safety over Level of Service (LOS) on transportation
projects. The Council can vote to ignore arbitrary LOS benchmarks on even a project-
specific basis. City staff was incorrect in telling you the Growth Management Act (GMA)
forces you to meet LOS benchmarks in the Mid-December study session, and should
publicly correct themselves on such an important point.
Councilmember Rebelowski was right to express doubt about this point in the study
session. Bremerton's own 6th Street and 11th Street Study recommends giving 11th Street
a road diet in addition to 6th, in spite of projections showing it would drop our LOS below
current goals. Nick Ataie, one of our city's representatives to the GMA-related Puget Sound
Regional Council, has also said you can vote to ignore LOS. Other cities around Puget
Sound routinely choose safety over LOS, evidenced by the multitude of LOS-constraining
safety projects moving forward in areas of Seattle and Tacoma with significantly heavier
traffic than Bremerton.
6th Street:
There appears to be ample room to fit in a "dedicated intersection" at 6th and Naval to
eliminate the need for kids from Naval Avenue Elementary to snake in between multiple
lanes of traffic in the "turn pockets" designed for both 6th Street and Naval. No-turn-on-red
signs and dedicated intersections can likely eliminate the need for them throughout the
rest of the two projects. In my email chain with planner Nick Ataie, below, I outline
arguments about why there's likely room for a "dedicated intersection" at 6th and Naval,
enabling protected bike lanes to serve both routes.
The new AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (Fifth Edition, 2024) also
says "mixing zones," a.k.a. turn pockets, are not a preferred design feature. AASHTO
standards for bike infrastructure are generally less progressive and safety-minded than
NACTO standards, so it's notable if we're not even meeting AASHTO recommendations,
especially for projects serving two elementary schools.
Naval Ave and Public Feedback:
At the Mid-December study session, Public Works argued forcefully that it was
unreasonable to send their design for Naval Avenue back for a redesign. Their design
directly serves Naval Avenue Elementary School and asks those kids to make multiple
correct merging decisions in "turn pockets," and lacks lane protection. They characterized
the community feedback on this as arriving late and coming out of nowhere, which is
blatantly false. Dianne Iverson (copied), the bike community's main representative on the
Complete Streets Committee, has been calling for protected bike lanes on this project
since very early stakeholder feedback opportunities in 2019. The responsible course of
action for Public Works, early in this planning process, would have been to correctly inform
you of your ability to direct them to consider ignoring LOS benchmarks, rather than moving
ahead with such an unsafe design.
Perhaps the upcoming designs for 6th Street and Naval Avenue prioritize safety slightly
better than past iterations, but please do not be squeamish about requiring designs to fully
meet modern standards and the example set by our peer cities on Puget Sound. Please do
not fund either the 6th Street or Naval Avenue projects if they continue to include turn
pockets and fail to include protection for bike lanes. Our peer cities are not paying millions
of dollars for brand new obsolete bike infrastructure - especially on projects serving
elementary schools. Public Works is incorrect in saying LOS benchmarks are tying our
hands and that they were unaware the public might want to protect bike lanes for kids.
Thanks for your consideration,
Erik Pedersen
Bremerton Planning Commission
District 3 Resident
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2024 11:38:26 AM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Fw: 6th Street Presentation
Nick,
I did a little more follow-up work on an argument for a protected/dedicated intersection based
on NACTO designs at 6th and Naval (and other intersection with "turn pockets" in your design)
I'd like to share with you.
It appears that we might have room for a protected or dedicated intersection at 6th and
Naval. The intersection of Dexter and Thomas in Seattle is the local example of a protected
intersection I'm aware of. Is that the one you referenced yesterday? My Google Earth Pro
mapping program shows it as not significantly wider than the 6th and Naval intersection you
propose to create after the right-of-way acquisitions (based on my rough observations of your
post right-of-way acquisition maps). The version of the Dexter and Thomas intersection shown
in aerial imagery isn't the current protected intersection configuration, but the curb-to-curb
measurements diagonally across the intersection are less than 100' in both directions (I do
realize the curbs have likely moved back in the current configuration).
However, your proposed 6th and Naval (post right-of-way acquisition) appears slightly larger
than this, or at least within just a foot or two in size (more than 100'). Furthermore, the parcels
at all four corners of this intersection include landscaping and/or simple surface parking areas
where slightly larger right-of-way acquisitions would be unlikely to significantly harm the
businesses on those parcels (which should keep costs down per the appraisals you'll do for the
acquisitions). To my layman's eyes, it seems like space is not preventing us from installing a
protected or dedicated intersection for 6th and Naval. Is that mostly correct? And if the
intersection isn't significantly wider, it likely wouldn't cost significantly more than your current
proposal, right?
That might simply leave bus turn radii as a limiting factor. It sure seems like buses make some
awfully tight turns at times (i.e. snaking from the Manette bridge into Manette's business
district). Are these bus turn radii requirements truly requirements, or are they simply
requests/recommendations? And would size constraints put us far out of whack with
recommendations, or would we be pretty close anyway? And might slightly larger right-of-way
acquisitions allow us to meet Kitsap Transit's request for bus turn radii in any case?
Thanks for your consideration and, again, thanks a lot for your time yesterday. I'm trying hard
to educate myself and other cyclists, so our comments can be better informed and more
useful.
Erik
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2024 4:23 PM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: 6th Street Presentation
Nick,
Thank you so much for your time today.
I found the photos of Eldridge Ave in Bellingham I was hunting for (attached). It's nothing
amazing - just an example of folks fitting plastic bollards in wherever they could, on a street
like 6th with lots of driveways.
Also, in a scenario where we can fit in protected lanes on 6th and Naval Ave, (with or
without removing the center turn lanes), the intersection of 6th and Naval (and others with
turn pockets) could really use NACTO's "Dedicated Intersection." I'd prefer this project
(which serves an elementary school) not occur than move forward with turn pockets. It's a
nonstarter for an all ages route. I think the early BLTS systems WSDOT's was based on
automatically bump a route with turn pockets up to a 3 or 4. Dedicated intersections also
provide extra protection with corner wedges, while taking up less space than a full
"protected intersection."
https://nacto.org/publication/dont-give-up-at-the-intersection/dedicated-intersections/
This website begins describing the dedicated intersection by saying, "(p)eople on bikes can
be given a dedicated path through the intersection even where there is not enough space
for a full bike setback." It sounds like there might be room to fit something like this in at 6th
and Naval.
Thanks again for your time,
Erik
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 2:24:34 PM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: 6th Street Presentation
Thanks.
From: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 2:22:22 PM
To: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: 6th Street Presentation
Sure – That works for me.
Nick Ataie, P.E., Project Manager - Transportation
City of Bremerton Engineering Division
Direct 360.473.2306 | Cell 564.222.0897
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 2:20 PM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: 6th Street Presentation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
My boss now wants to meet with me at noon on Thursday. Would 1:30 work?
From: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 12:28:12 PM
To: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: 6th Street Presentation
Sounds great – It’s on my calendar. Just call my cell # when you arrive and I’ll let you in from our
main door.
Nick Ataie, P.E., Project Manager - Transportation
City of Bremerton Engineering Division
Direct 360.473.2306 | Cell 564.222.0897
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 12:26 PM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: 6th Street Presentation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I'd be happy to walk up on Thursday. Your maps and other info would undoubtedly be
helpful.
Noon?
From: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 11:08:37 AM
To: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: 6th Street Presentation
Erik,
That sounds wonderful! This Thursday would work for me around lunchtime. Otherwise I could be
available after lunch both this Wednesday and Thursday. Let me know what works for you. Happy
to make the journey downstairs or if you wanted to come by my office I could pull some information
up on my compute to share.
Nick Ataie, P.E., Project Manager - Transportation
City of Bremerton Engineering Division
Direct 360.473.2306 | Cell 564.222.0897
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 9:23 AM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: 6th Street Presentation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Nick,
I'm really looking forward to that presentation. I would absolutely love and appreciate the
chance to meet up with you though. I'm clearly not a traffic engineer and have a lot to
learn.
I work on the fourth floor of the Norm Dicks Center, and there are always lunch tables
available on the fourth floor, so a brown bag lunch meeting would work for me most days.
(My office also has a whole conference room that's virtually never used.)
Might something like that work for you?
Many thanks,
Erik
360-961-4678
From: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 8:55:42 AM
To: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: 6th Street Presentation
Erik,
I wanted to let you know that staff will be discussing “Multimodal Level of Service” at the
December 17th Public Works Committee Meeting
(https://www.bremertonwa.gov/Calendar.aspx?EID=3298) and the meeting will be hybrid
allowing attendance in-person or virtually. While public comment is not allowed at these meetings,
the information to be discussed is very relevant to many of your questions regarding Bicycle Level
of Traffic Stress (BLTS).
The intent of this discussion is to determine what sort of policy the City could implement to provide
additional clarity on Complete Streets projects (including 6th Street) on how we appropriately
measure/define a “level of service” (or level of stress) for road users and how that “level of service”
translates to physical improvements. We used the WSDOT methodology as a starting point for
BLTS for the 6th Street project, but there are several other methodologies used by other agencies
and we are by no means tied to that.
Regarding your questions below, I’d be happy to discuss in more detail with you, but it would be a
lot of information to try and package in an email. Let me know if there is a way we could coordinate
a phone call or meet in person.
Thanks,
Nick Ataie, P.E., Project Manager - Transportation
City of Bremerton Engineering Division
Direct 360.473.2306 | Cell 564.222.0897
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2024 2:13 PM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey
<Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg
Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jane Rebelowski
<Jane.Rebelowski@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Denise Frey <Denise.Frey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Anna
Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: 6th Street Presentation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Nick,
Thanks for the quick response. I hit you with a big email just now and we're headed into the
holiday season, so I can wait longer than that if you're willing to dig into BLTS
methodology. That'd be a significant service to the community that's worth waiting for.
Many thanks,
Erik
From: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2024 2:07 PM
To: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey
<Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg
Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jane Rebelowski
<Jane.Rebelowski@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Denise Frey <Denise.Frey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Anna
Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: RE: 6th Street Presentation
Erik,
Great seeing you Tuesday! Thank you for taking the time to dig into some of the previous studies,
the WSDOT level of traffic stress methodology, and pass forward some thoughtful
requests/questions.
If you could bear with me on responding (likely next week) it would be much appreciated.
I hope you have a wonderful weekend.
Nick
Nick Ataie, P.E., Project Manager - Transportation
City of Bremerton Engineering Division
Direct 360.473.2306 | Cell 564.222.0897
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2024 12:36 PM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Jeff Coughlin <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey
<Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg
Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jane Rebelowski
<Jane.Rebelowski@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Denise Frey <Denise.Frey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Anna
Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: 6th Street Presentation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Nick,
Thanks for your presentation on the 6th Street project earlier this week. It seems like a step in
the right direction, especially with regard to your acknowledgement of WSDOT's Bicycle Level
of Traffic Stress (BLTS) evaluation system, which calls for protected or separated bike lanes in
many circumstances. Most of our peer cities on Puget Sound go beyond WSDOT's base goal of
BLTS 1 and 2 outcomes on their scale (only BLTS 1 is truly kid and novice-safe), but educating
the public about this concept is a big step forward.
The presentation brought up five main points in my mind:
1. I saw a BLTS chart shown in the center of the room on Tuesday, but none of the BLTS
evaluation outcomes shown along specific road sections. After digging into WSDOT's
BLTS guide, I wonder if this recent design consistently meets WSDOT's goal of BLTS 1
and 2 outcomes, since it's such a busy street. I looked at the City's 2020 6th Street and
11th Street Corridor Feasibility Study, and they use a different scale to measure traffic
volume than the Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) WSDOT's BLTS tables use. Can you
please make public the AADT figures for 6th Street and Public Works' own evaluation of
where their current design falls on WSDOT's BLTS tables?
2. WSDOT's explanation of how to use its BLTS tables also lists other considerations that
might degrade a road's ranking from, say, BLTS 2 to a BLTS 3 (which would then not
meet WSDOT standards), such as significant truck traffic or tons of intersecting roads
and driveways (which 6th Street has both of in abundance). I think WSDOT's BLTS tables
are more of a general guide than a comprehensive ruleset, and they also don't take
center turn lanes (as the recent design for 6th includes) into consideration. I'd argue the
center turn lane should bump 6th Street half-way down from the "1 thru lane per
direction" category to the "2 thru lanes per direction" category. In addition, the original
BLTS rating system, which WSDOT's guide is based on, judges that "turn pockets," which
sandwich cyclists between two lanes of car traffic and require them to make correct
merging decisions, automatically result in a BLTS grade of 3 or 4 and are unacceptable
on main bike network routes. No kid or novice cyclist should ever be asked to make
correct merging decisions or be sandwiched between lanes of cars and trucks. WSDOT
Design Manual M 22-01.23 shows an example of a "Protected Intersection" (p. 1310-45)
that avoids the need for turn pockets and would almost certainly save lives and increase
ridership when paired with protected lanes. Even if our new design for 6th technically
meets WSDOT's guidelines per their BLTS tables, it likely does not meet them in spirit
because of these other considerations.
3. Our evaluation of the 6th Street project should hinge on whether this is Bremerton's
main east-west all-ages-and-abilities route. The answer to this question effects every
other consideration. I argue that 6th Street should our all-ages route, and if we need to
do away with the center turn lane in narrow road sections to provide bike lanes with
ample space and ample protection, we must. The city has Burwell and 11th St. as our
big vehicle-movers, and there's two elementary schools on or near 6th Street (Naval
Ave. and Star of the Sea). Other peer cities of ours around Puget Sound have been
willing to cause a small increase in traffic, or remove a row of parking, on selected
streets in limited circumstances like this. A "neighborhood greenway" on, say,
8th Street could perhaps remove 6th Street's responsibility to serve all-ages-and-
abilities. However, until we see plans for a robust, continuous alternative, most of us
will argue that if the center turn lane on 6th needs to go, it needs to go. There would
still be space for a center turn lane along most of the route, so the extra traffic shouldn't
be bad in relation to the added safety benefits for all road users, including pedestrians
and those in vehicles.
4. For the next design presentation, can we please show the public the option of the mini
"jersey barriers" Seattle is installing nowadays? The public deserves to at least be made
aware of this option, whether we can afford to install them or not. The 2015 Federal
Highway Administration Separated Bike Lane Planning Design Guide shows that
concrete barriers do, in fact, increase protection from crashes (p. 85). That's also
intuitively true to us all.
5. Lastly, if there are any safety measures we're not including in our designs because of
cost alone, can we please make a list of them for future consideration? Budget
decisions are always difficult, but this type of transparency about our options and
decisions would be helpful for everyone engaged in this process.
Many thanks,
Erik Pedersen
Bremerton Planning Commission
District 3 Resident
360-961-4678
From: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, November 8, 2024 8:00 AM
To: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: 6th Street Details
Good morning Erik,
I’m glad you plan on attending the meeting next Tuesday!
I can provide some general information below for your questions, but I want to caveat these by
saying these questions are much better discussed in a conversation Tuesday and I don’t want to
create a situation where information could be taken out of context. I hope you and others can come
to the meeting with a collaborative mindset, ask questions, provide perspectives, and most
importantly provide feedback.
Protected Bike Lanes: We will be including design recommendations for protected bike lanes
(unspecified treatment type) at specific locations. We are using WSDOT methodology for Bicycle
Level of Traffic Stress (BLTS) as a basis for evaluating needs and also considering site-specific
factors. WSDOT refers to protected bike lanes as “separated” bike lanes. I can tell you that want
will be presented next week will not depict a fully protected bike lane corridor on 6th Street. The
rationale is likely more than I could get in an email so I would be happy to discuss in more depth at
the meeting. From a City maintenance standpoint, there has been quite the discussion on
considerations/needs for maintenance, but I wouldn’t say that is driving (no pun intended) the
decision-making process at this point.
Road Widening / Right Turn Pockets: One of the primary design goals of this project was to avoid
any roadway widening; I’m happy to say that we will, indeed, present a design concept which
includes no widening of the existing curbs. We will also have an option which shows curb widening
at only one intersection (Naval Ave). Both of these options will include some type of vehicle right-
turn treatment at that intersection to meet our current operations standards. The only other right-
turn lane needed to meet vehicle operation standards is in the WB direction at Warren Ave. Some
other existing right-turn lanes will be shown as removed as they were determined to not be
necessary for meeting operational requirements. Overall, much less potential anticipated bike
lane/turn lane conflict areas than what currently exists on Kitsap Way.
Thanks again for the email and providing some insight into priorities from the bike community; I’ll
see you Tuesday.
Nick
Nick Ataie, P.E., Project Manager - Transportation
City of Bremerton Engineering Division
Direct 360.473.2306 | Cell 564.222.0897
From: Erik Pedersen <erikepedersen@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2024 6:14 PM
To: Nick Ataie <Nick.Ataie@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: 6th Street Details
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments
unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Nick,
I'm very curious about the details on the 6th Street road diet project. I spent my whole
childhood growing up on 7th Street, so 6th was always the boogeyman between me and
the nearest park. I'll be there on Tuesday.
Do you know if the bike lanes will be protected?
Is there going to be any road widening at intersections? Will the bike lane have to merge
through any right turn lanes into "turn pockets"? Those are the things the bike community
will be looking for.
Thanks,
Erik Pedersen
District 3 Resident
RE: Naval Base Kitsap - Comment to Agenda Item B.6 on January 8, 2025 (Item 6.B on January
15, 2025)
From: Satter, Allison E CIV (USA)
Sent: Wednesday, January 8, 2025 4:13 PM
To: City Council; Jennifer Chamberlin; Denise Frey; Jeff Coughlin; Jane Rebelowski; Michael Goodnow;
Eric Younger
Cc: Hale, John W CAPT USN NAVB KITSAP SVD WA (USA); Baerg, Alexander T CAPT USN NAVB
KITSAP SVD WA (USA); Herbig, Jennifer D CIV USN NAVSHIPYDIMF PGS WA (USA); Thomas
Knuckey; Gunnar Fridriksson; Shane Weber; Ned Lever
Subject: RE: Naval Base Kitsap - Comment to Agenda Item B.6 and 6.B
Good Afternoon City of Bremerton’s City Council:
We would like to provide comment to the City’s proposal for the 6th Street and Naval Avenue road
projects for the Council’s consideration for the action on January 15) :
Naval Base Kitsap (NBK) commuters and/or visitors to NBK-Bremerton will continue to queue on
City Streets. Near the Naval Gate, it has been typical for queuing vehicles to back up on Naval
Avenue, and at times extend to 6th Street.
It is very typical to have minor issues at the Navy’s entry gate. Those small unavoidable issues
are a contributing factor to queuing. Those minor issues may close a entry gate lane for a few
minutes. At peak time, the Naval Gate may process ~12 cars a minute. A 5-minute delay at the
gate would delay the processing of ~60-cars; 60 cars queuing in one lane is ~1,200’. There is
~1,300’ from Naval Gate to 6th Street.
With the City proposals (6th and Naval Avenue) and the current NBK’s vehicle queuing, we
assume the current queuing distance will likely be increased. Part of our assumption includes that
the vehicles traveling to downtown/Ferry will also be within the NBK-vehicle queue instead of
having a lane open to avoid the line, thus adding to the backup.
The Navy has no funded plans to improve base access to NBK-Bremerton. We continue to have
an incentive program to support mass transportation, Worker/Driver program and van/car-pooling
commuting and we are conducting an analysis on NBK-Bremerton to try to improve traffic flow on
base. Though we are studying on-base traffic patterns, there are no funded plans to improve the
queuing at the NBK-Bremerton gates.
We also have no plans to reduce NBK-Bremerton’s operations currently. Currently, NBK-
Bremerton is studying projects to update the Shipyard, which includes analyzing if this work will
bring extra contractors to the shipyard (and how much). We should know more through the
Environmental Review to be released this year. Also, teleworking is implemented in some areas
on NBK-Bremerton but is always subject to Department of Defense and Federal policies which
are subject to change at any time. As such, we do not have plans to reduce NBK-Bremerton’s
workforce, but future actions may be increasing the population who comes to the base.
It is estimated NBK-Bremerton has approximately 18,000-25,000 people living and working on
base every day; majority of that workforce commutes to NBK-Bremerton. It has been identified
that at peak AM time, approximately 700 vehicles/hour enter at the Naval Avenue Gate.
Ensuring that the workforce can get to the installation to work is essential to maintain current
Navy operations. It is so important that Department of Defense provided funding to the City
($675,000 in 2020) to develop a plan to address the City’s transportation issues and ensure
Bremerton’s growth will not impede on NBK-Bremerton; that resulted in the City’s Joint
Compatibility Transportation Plan (JCTP).
We appreciate the City’s Staffs hard work to try to find solutions that accommodate all stakeholders into
the City’s proposed transportation projects. Navy understands the importance of safe and predictable
transportation routes for all modes of transportation.
I have also included Naval Base Kitsap’s Commanding Officer, Captain Hale, and Puget Sound Naval
Shipyard & Intermediate Facility’s Executive Director, Jennifer Herbig. We are available to help educate
on the Navy if the Council has any questions.
V/r,
Allison Satter
Community Planning & Liaison Officer (CPLO)
Naval Base Kitsap (NBK)
Cell: (360) 930-2934
Email: Allison.e.Satter.civ@us.navy.mil
Published for
January 15
Council Meeting
Item 6B
Public Comments
From: Jessica Mar�nez <jessicalouisemar�nez@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 7:35 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: supplemental agreement no. 4
I see that supplemental agreement no. 4 is on the agenda for the council mee�ng tomorrow. Not sure if
you will be vo�ng at the same mee�ng or not but I sincerely hope that you will vote in favor of a plan
that will provide beter safety for pedestrians and cyclists vs. one that will move car traffic faster.
Both of my children had to navigate unsafe traffic when they atended naval avenue. We lived so close to
the school yet we never felt safe le�ng them walk to school without us.
My husband was struck by a city bus while cycling. His accident could have been prevented with good
bike infrastructure. He survived but as I’m sure you can imagine it was trauma�c. In addi�on to costly for
the jurisdic�on where this occurred.
No mater how you vote I know that you will have cons�tuents who will be unhappy and I don’t envy
your posi�on. Car traffic within the city limits doesn’t need to move any faster and I am happy to get
where I’m going later when it means my neighbors are safer. Happy to see my tax dollars being used for
real substan�al improvements.
I hope that you will seriously consider adding protected bike lanes and simplifying the car traffic near
naval avenue so that elementary school kids don’t have to navigate and try to understand complex car
traffic. Please vote in favor of residents safety over commuter speed and convenience.
Jessica Mar�nez
Sent from my iPhone
From: michelbike99@gmail.com <michelbike99@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2025 8:49 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval Avenue redesign
Dear Councilmembers.
Naval Avenue is a key North South corridor. We cycle it frequently and would dearly like to see
protected bike lanes, not just paint, on the upcoming redevelopment. The world has moved on and
now we know we need protection, not just paint, for active transportation. Let’s do it now rather
than waiting 10 years to realize our mistake and have to re-do it then!
We are much more likely to get grant money this way. Recent experience with Almira showed just
that; a mediocre proposal was turned down, but when it was done with the latest in active
transportation engineering, we got the grant. Safety is a priority, and the current preliminary design
does not offer that.
We would also like to see shorter pedestrian crossings. These have been shown to reduce car-
pedestrian accidents.
There’s a good case for making “no right turn on red” at some lights. This provides cyclists and
pedestrians with time to cross. We have had several close calls as both pedestrians and as cyclists
with a “right hook” with a car turning right on red.
Outreach- when will there be public hearings? Having said that, we saw from the sixth street event,
mumbled throughout the room was the phrase “protected bike lanes”. There was talk then of
having an ordinance passed that protected bike lanes would be the norm unless there were some
exceptional reasons NOT to have them. I look forward to such an ordinance.
Thank you for reading this, and we look forward to you defending a proper bike-friendly design.
Charlie & Carol Michel
(360) 710-0616 Cell
(360) 830-4984 Home
When it comes to addressing the climate crisis, none of us is off the hook… and we cannot solve a
crisis without treating it like a crisis.
From: David Schmitz <daviddschmitzz@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2025 9:48 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: on the Naval Avenue road project
Councilmember Goodnow,
I grew up in Bremerton, attended Naval Avenue Elementary School for two years, and have lived within
District 5 for most of my life. Today I am writing about the Naval Avenue project. While a road diet and
bike lanes are necessary for Naval Avenue, there are a couple of details that I think could weigh down
the overall good of the project.
Firstly, having automobiles cross over a bike lane to reach a turn pocket seems unsafe for both cyclists
and motorists, and this is magnified if kids are to encounter this while biking to and from school.
Secondly, turn pockets would increase the distance of a crosswalk, resulting in pedestrians spending
more time exposed to car traffic -- again, this concern is magnified when kids walking to and from school
are part of the scenario. With this in mind, protected bike lanes would go a long way towards bicycle
mobility in that area and would make it safer for kids in addition to cyclists and motorists as a whole.
I would rather something formidable rather than incremental is implemented while we have the
opportunity, if only because something incremental might result in having to circle back and repeat the
process in a few years. To that end, I am reminded of KeyArena being basically outdated the day it
opened in 1995 after the remodel -- granted, we are not losing an NBA team here, nor do we necessarily
need to build the Climate Pledge Arena equivalent of street design and bike lanes, but we do need
something that will be sufficient for a while.
Thank you for your consideration.
David Schmitz
From:Barbara Hagedorn
To:City Council
Subject:Naval avenue
Date:Tuesday, January 14, 2025 4:21:37 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I’m writing to voice my concerns re the Naval Ave improvements. I am especially concerned with getting protected
bike lanes. This road runs by an elementary school & I think the children’s safety, as well as that of pedestrians,
should be prioritized over getting folks who don’t even live in Bremerton, in & out of town quickly.
Please consider these thoughts as you make your decision.
Sincerely,
Barb Hagedorn
Sent from my iPhone
From:Jeff Iverson
To:City Council
Cc:Greg Wheeler
Subject:Naval Ave 90% plan
Date:Tuesday, January 14, 2025 11:39:48 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Bremerton City Council Members
My name is Jeff Iverson, I live at 3701 6th St in Bremerton. Mr. Goodnow is my representative.
We do not support the Naval Avenue 90% plan. Please do not approve it! For too long Bremerton streets have been
designed and laid out for out-of-town commuters. We already have roads designed as thoroughfares (11th, Warren,
Kitsap, Burwell…), Naval Ave and 6th St do not need to be added to that list. Bremerton roads need to start being
managed for the people that live here, not just the people driving through.
Our streets and intersections need to be designed to protect the weakest of our residents, children, cyclists, and
handicapped. Roads in school zones should be made smaller with more obstructions to slow cars, isolated and
protected bike lanes are needed. Wider lanes and big corners at intersections only speed up traffic making it more
dangerous for our children navigating and crossing these streets.
When we moved back to Bremerton to start our family I had hoped that I could send my child to the same
elementary school I went, Crownhill Elementary (the one before the 1993 fire). We live just across Kitsap Way,
Crownhill and West Hills are both walking distance so there is no bus route for either. Our roads are so unsafe for a
child to navigate that they will never be able to walk to school, we’ve chosen to deliver them to a charter school
daily instead.
Please don’t support putting good money and intentions into bad plans.
Sincerely,
Jeff Iverson
Denise Portmann
Sebastian Iverson-Portmann
Sent from my iPad
From:Jessica Torrez-Riley
To:City Council
Subject:Naval Ave Project
Date:Tuesday, January 14, 2025 11:25:50 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I’m very glad the city is taking on effort to make Naval Ave more safe for pedestrians and
bicyclists. As a resident of 5th street, I frequently walk this corridor and appreciate measures
to widen safe zones for people and slow down cars. It is my understanding that further review
and updates are needed, particularly for bicyclist safety. I encourage City Council to fine tune
existing plans to prioritize these elements as well as include more robust transit considerations
in planning for Naval and 6th Street road diets.
Thank you,
Jess
--
Jessica Torrez-Riley
C: 425-442-4712
linkedin.com/in/jessicatorrezriley
From:Zach Weaver
To:City Council
Subject:Naval avenue bike lanes
Date:Tuesday, January 14, 2025 4:57:47 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I love that you are considering a "road diet" and bike lanes. I strongly advise against the "turn
pocket" that will force kids to bike into traffic. Cars do not pay attention to bikes. Putting this
next to an elementary school seems wildly irresponsible. Due to the proximity of the school
and the increased likelihood of a younger ridership, these bike lanes should be protected, not
jutting in between lanes.
I have two kids, and Naval should be the school that they walk to when they are old enough. I
want to feel like the city cares about their safety more than the throughput of cars. Please
prioritize the well being of folks that live here, not the convenience of rush hour.
Thank you,
Zach Weaver
From: B Anderson <anderson.b@wavecable.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2025 7:14 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval Avenue improvements
I support the efforts by the West Sound Cycle Club and Street Smart Bremerton to make the Naval
avenue design safer for cyclists and pedestrians. Naval Avenue has a park and elementary school. Many
families live on this street. My son, his partner, and young daughter live nearby. They walk to the park as
it is the nearest green space to their home. Their young daughter will soon be old enough to learn to
ride a bike. They walk their dogs through these neighborhoods. My son also walks to his job at Puget
Sound Naval Shipyard using Naval Avenue. They deserve a safe place to walk and their daughter
deserves a safe place to play. Please priori�ze the families that live in these neighborhoods in future
improvements to these roads.
Beth Anderson
360-620-0893
Sent from my iPad
From: Erin Larsen-Cooper <elarsencooper@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2025 7:11 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg Wheeler
<Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval Avenue Road Diet
Dear City Council,
Please vote against the current design for Naval Avenue. It's clearly not safe and we must do
better.
I'm a Bremerton resident with two small children. The risk of getting hurt or killed by a car is very
real to me. I have a lifelong disability from getting hit by a car while biking to work, which
might've been prevented by better bike infrastructure or a design that slows cars down. I'm
painfully reminded every day of the risks of unprotected bike lanes, turn pockets, and other
unsafe infrastructure. I want something better, and safer, for my kids.
I'm disheartened when I look at the unprotected bike lanes and the intersections where cyclists
are asked to merge between multiple rows of cars. I've biked a lot in other cities and towns, so
I've seen real-world examples of cities doing better. Protected bike lanes aren't new anymore.
Seattle and other cities are building "protected intersections". This infrastructure can save lives
or prevent others from getting hurt and disabled.
Naval Avenue is the home of Naval Avenue Elementary School. I'm appalled that we haven't
started from a place of designing this street with infrastructure that’s safe for kids.
I'm also a driver and I understand the need to get places in a car. But I would never trade getting
some place a few minutes faster, for potentially killing or injuring a pedestrian or cyclist. Let’s
design our streets like lives depend on it – because they do.
Thank you,
Erin Larsen-Cooper
Bremerton, WA
From: Kristen <smokeyspice@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2025 7:28 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval Ave project
Please do not approve the latest proposal for the area around Naval Ave that Public Works
is trying to push through without serious reconsideration of safety for bikers, walkers or our
disabled neighbors.
The goal of the plan should be prioritizing people’s safety who are not in cars. You want to
be a better city far into the future? Take into account that our current streets are not safe
for these activities and adopting the new plan put forth coupled with the projections of
population growth endangers your constituents.
Thank you for voting against this wholly unsafe proposal.
Sincerely,
Kristen Sluiter
1036 5th St.
"Laughter is the joyous, beautiful, universal evergreen of life."
~Abraham Lincoln
From: Robert Ford <bertford@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2025 5:41 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Greg Wheeler
<Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Concerns Regarding Proposed Redesign of 6th Avenue
Dear Members of the Bremerton City Council,
I am writing to express my serious concerns regarding the proposed redesign of 6th
Avenue, particularly the impacts on pedestrian safety around Navel Elementary. As a
former resident of Bremerton for the first 20 years of my life, I have a deep connection to
the community and the well-being of its residents, especially children.
This project will have a significant and long-lasting impact on the safety of 6th Avenue and
the surrounding neighborhood for decades to come. Therefore, it's crucial that the design
prioritize the safety and well-being of all users, especially the most vulnerable:
pedestrians, cyclists, and children.
The proposed widening of 6th Avenue raises several significant safety concerns:
• Increased Crossing Distances: Widening the street will inevitably increase the
distance pedestrians must cross, making it more difficult and dangerous, especially
for young children and elderly individuals.
• Wider Turning Radius: While intended to improve traffic flow, wider turning radii
can encourage higher speeds, making it more challenging for drivers to yield to
pedestrians in crosswalks.
• Potential for Increased Traffic Speeds: Wider lanes can inadvertently encourage
drivers to increase their speed, further endangering pedestrians.
I urge the City Council to carefully reconsider these aspects of the proposed redesign. I
believe the following modifications would significantly enhance pedestrian safety:
• Reduce Lane Widths: Narrower lanes can naturally slow traffic and improve driver
visibility of pedestrians.
• Implement Traffic Calming Measures: Consider incorporating traffic calming
measures such as speed bumps, raised crosswalks, or chicanes to further slow
traffic and improve pedestrian safety.
• Prioritize Pedestrian Safety: Re-evaluate the design to prioritize the safety of
pedestrians, particularly children, in the vicinity of the school.
I strongly believe that the safety of our children and all community members should be
paramount in any transportation project. I urge the City Council to carefully consider these
concerns and make necessary adjustments to the proposed 6th Avenue redesign to ensure
the safety and well-being of all who use this vital corridor for generations to come.
Sincerely,
Robert Ford
A protected bike lane: A Dad is escorting his son home from school on a
protected bike lane in a city of 124,000. Safety matters.
An open letter to the Bremerton City Council about Naval Avenue
safety improvements. city.council@ci.bremerton.wa.us
From: dianne iverson <diverson1950@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2025 11:27 AM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval Avenue Pause
What is the most important question concerning Naval Avenue active
transportation improvements?
For those of us who live in Bremerton, safety is our top priority. The current design of
Naval Avenue recommended by city staff does not meet the safety standards I want for
our city, for our children, and for those of us who are disabled. We can do better.
So what are the safety issues that need further discussion with the community
and the Navy?
1. No right turn on red for cars. People not in cars need time to cross at intersections
before the cars.
2. Length of the pedestrian crossing at intersections. Shorter crosswalks are safer. The
Mayor's design increases the length of the crosswalks which makes it less safe to cross
a street than what exists now before any improvements are even made. Cities across
Puget Sound are currently upgrading crosswalks so that they are shorter. Why?
Because shorter crosswalks are safer. Why is the city proposing lower safety standards
in this multi-million dollar project?
3. High-tech surface sensor for pedestrians, bikes and wheelchair users which gives
lead time for pedestrians, bikes, and people who use wheelchairs.
4. A higher level of protection than painted "bike lanes" (plastic barriers, concrete,
barriers, bollards) More people of all ages and abilities will use a higher level of
protection. Lack of safety is the number one reason for people choosing not to ride.
So what are the next steps in resolving the remaining safety issues for Bremerton
residents?
1.Take a pause. There is no construction money granted to this project right now. A
grant must be written using the design accepted by Council. To submit an unsafe
design for a grant is not a good investment of our taxes. Let's design a safer street for
active transportation users before writing a grant. A safer design increases the odds of
acquiring a grant. (Almira Drive did not receive funds with its first grant application
because the design was not safe enough for kids, for families and for those that use
wheelchairs. When the city improved its design on Almira, the grant was awarded.) If
Almira Drive, which connects a school to its neighborhood, can be upgraded to a safer
street design for all users, so can Naval. Naval Avenue deserves the same safety
standards as Almira Drive for its residents. It can be done.
2.Inform the neighborhood through in person discussions. More neighborhood
residents need to participate in the design process of our multi-modal upgrades on
Bremerton's streets. No one from the adjoining neighborhoods on Naval were asked to
serve on the Naval Avenue stakeholders committee. No one on the Naval Avenue
stakeholders committee lived near Naval Avenue. The City of Bremerton has a
responsibility to the local residents to do expanded outreach. An on-line survey is only
one tool for gathering information from residents. But an on-line tool doesn't serve to
bring people together and learn from each other to build common ground and
understanding.
Does the city have the resources to improve the Mayor's recommended design of
Naval Avenue? Yes. The city's engineering staff is capable of adjusting the current
design based on the community's needs. It does not have to go out for a contract if the
city chooses to use its own employees as the experts.
Bremerton can do better for its citizens. Former Mayor Lisa Helps of Victoria BC
dramatically improved her city for bikes, pedestrians, and people who use wheelchairs
over the last 7 years. When asked why she was able to complete the multi-faceted re-
design of her city's streets, she attributed it to extensive community outreach. See
photo below of two men in Victoria using the protected bike lane to move about the city.
Dianne Iverson
Member of the Naval Avenue stakeholders Committee
I've advocated for protected bike lanes on Naval since 2019.
From: Nish Chaudhary <nish_c@live.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2025 12:18 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Greg Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Naval avenue bicycle and pedestrian improvements project
Dear City Council and Mayor,
I am writing to express my strong support for improvements to the Naval Avenue street design,
specifically to enhance safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other micro-mobility users.
As we face the urgent challenges of climate change, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from
transportation is critical. Transportation accounts for nearly 40% of emissions in Washington
state, and designing infrastructure that supports non-automobile travel is essential for a
sustainable future.
While I appreciate the city's efforts to improve the Naval Avenue corridor, the current proposed
design has several significant flaws that must be addressed for it to provide real options for
biking, walking, and rolling safely. These include:
1. Redesigning the "lateral design" sections between 5th & 6th Streets and 10th & 11th
Streets. The proposed "mixing zone" design creates conflicts between cyclists and
vehicles. Studies show that these are the least comfortable and safest options. Quoting
from (Monsere, C. 2019, section 5.10, Summary): “When considering the expected level
of comfort, protected intersections (bend-out) and bike signals were found to provide the
best expected rider comfort. Designs that move bicyclists and motorists into shared
space (mixing zones or lateral shifts) were viewed as least comfortable”. I urge the city
to adopt fully protected, bend-out designs as recommended by the FHWA’s separated
bike lane guidelines. See (FHWA-HEP-15-025, 2015)
2. Incorporating physical barriers for bike lanes. In a hilly, rainy area like ours, safety
requires more than paint and flex posts. Physical separation, such as metal bollards,
curbs, or planters, is essential to protect cyclists and encourage safe biking. This should
be standard across the entire corridor, with clear explanations when such treatments
aren’t feasible. Council should direct staff to ensure that the design explicitly
incorporates and lists these vertical elements before authorizing any further progress on
this project.
3. Reducing crossing distances on 11th Street. The sidewalk design should be modified to
shorten pedestrian crossings, in line with improvements on nearby streets, to reduce
the risk of vehicle-pedestrian collisions. The design accounts for this on 10th street and
15th street and needs to do the same on 11th street.
Additionally, it’s critical that the city shift from a "check-box" approach to safety design. The
community has repeatedly asked for infrastructure that truly protects cyclists and pedestrians,
including physical barriers and safe intersection designs. This feedback must be incorporated
into the design, rather than being dismissed.
The city has a responsibility to create a safe, accessible environment for all residents, in line
with its own municipal code (Ord. 5354 §2, 2018). It is disheartening to see repeated disregard
for the community’s input and the latest safety research.
We need a city leadership that is committed to shifting from car-centric infrastructure to a
multimodal transportation network.
In conclusion, I request that the City Council and Mayor direct staff to revise the design to
address these concerns before moving forward.
Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
Sincerely,
Nishchal Chaudhary
References:
1. Inventory, 2021 : https://ecology.wa.gov/air-climate/reducing-greenhouse-gas-
emissions/tracking-greenhouse-gases/ghg-inventories
2. Ord. 5354 §2 (part), 2018 : https://mrsc.org/getmedia/89cde056-8b0a-42ab-83d9-
830f7ad33275/b72o5354.pdf
3. Monsere, C et.al, 2019: Contextual Guidance at Intersections for Protected Bicycle
Lanes, Portland State University: https://ppms.trec.pdx.edu/media/project_files/NITC-
RR-987-Contextual_Guidance_at_Intersections_for_Protected_Bicycle_Lanes.pdf
4. FHWA-HEP-15-025, 205 : Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide, Federal
Highway Administration.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/separated_bi
kelane_pdg/separatedbikelane_pdg.pdf
Page 1 of 15
From: Jennifer Chamberlin Jennifer.Chamberlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2025 6:01 PM
To: City Council City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Subject: FW: Re: Traffic Collision and Fatality Data in Bremerton (Travis Merrigan)
Sent with Sophos Secure Email
From: "Travis Merrigan" <bikebremerton@gmail.com>
Sent: January 14, 2025 08:01 AM
To: "Anna Mockler" <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>, "Jennifer Chamberlin"
<Jennifer.Chamberlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>, "Jane Rebelowski" <janerebelowski@yahoo.com>, "Jeff
Coughlin" <Jeff.Coughlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>, "Denise Frey" <Denise.Frey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: FW: Re: Traffic Collision and Fatality Data in Bremerton (Travis Merrigan)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Thanks for your interest, Anna. I'm including Jennifer because she asked for similar info, and members of the
PW Committee - thank you all for your work..
Here's a heatmap of car-on-pedestrian, injury collisions in Kitsap, 2014-24.
https://fortress.maptive.com/ver4/59305193b1ed56dc2e683104a06e1119/694118
Some screen grabs of the same - big hotspots on Warren/Wheaton, 6th St and Naval @ 6th and Naval at
Burwell.
Cheers,
Travis
2
3
On Mon, Jan 13, 2025 at 7:58 AM Anna Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us> wrote:
Thank you, Travis, for your kind offer. I am trying to track down "heat maps" of vehicle collisions which were
produced on request by BPD through the end of 2023. In 2024, I was told that BPD's new software doesn't
permit the production of such maps.
I've been trying to get a response from BPD for a year now.
Anna
Anna Mockler
District Six Councilor
Government can't make things perfect: it can make them better.
4
From: Travis Merrigan <bikebremerton@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2025 7:09 PM
To: Anna Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Traffic Collision and Fatality Data in Bremerton (Travis Merrigan)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
*internal
Anna,
I'd be happy to show you how to access the crash data. I've looked at it closely for months. We should sit
down at a laptop. I'll show you and teach you how to dig into the data yourself, if you're a data hound like me.
:)
On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 6:22 PM Anna Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us> wrote:
Thank you so much for this, Travis. It would be great if Bremerton data were called out from this data set.
Councilor Chamberlin, you've told us in public as Council President that public safety data records has this
data for Bremerton, when I asked where it could be found, as I couldn't find it. Since Barbara Forbes of BPD
told me in early 2024 that BPD's new software no longer records such data, I really look forward to your
better knowledge of collected data.
Sincerely,
Anna
Anna Mockler
District Six Councilor
Government can't make things perfect: it can make them better.
From: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2025 2:33 PM
To: Travis Merrigan; City Council
Cc: Greg Wheeler; Thomas Knuckey; Shane Weber; Ned Lever; Tom Wolfe
Subject: RE: Traffic Collision and Fatality Data in Bremerton (Travis Merrigan)
Mr. Merrigan,
Thank you for providing this information, which I have shared with the full Council.
It is appreciated that you took the time to submit this data.
Lori Smith
Legislative Office Manager
Bremerton City Council
(360) 473-5280
5
From: Travis Merrigan <bikebremerton@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2025 2:26 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: Greg Wheeler <Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey
<Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Shane Weber <Shane.Weber@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Ned Lever
<Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Fwd: Traffic Collision and Fatality Data in Bremerton
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Greetings Councilors.
I had the pleasure of speaking with CM Chamberlin recently. She asked some really good questions about
how many deaths and serious injuries occur in WA and Bremerton, and how that number had greatly
increased since the pandemic (answer, it's really bad, and much worse since 2019.) I thought you might all
benefit from that information, including how to make your own maps of danger spots in your own district.
(see below)
I'm greatly appreciative to all the City employees and leaders who are working to make our streets safer from
traffic violence.
Best,
Travis Merrigan
From: Travis Merrigan <bikebremerton@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 8:00 AM
Subject: Traffic Collision and Fatality Data in Bremerton
To: Jennifer Chamberlin <Jennifer.Chamberlin@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Jennifer,
At your request, I prepared some info about how WA's and Bremerton's streets are becoming much more
dangerous, and killing many more people compared to before the pandemic. The causes of the increased
deaths are widely debated, but likely culprits include: larger cars, cell phone distraction, speeding, police
stopped giving tickets and legal weed (more impaired drivers.)
The increase in traffic fatalities has been covered by local and national press, including the Kitsap Sun,
Seattle Times and New York Times. According to Harvard, the high traffic fatalities amount to a 'public health
crisis.'
Here are some great sources of local data on traffic collisions and fatalities.
6
The WA Traffic Safety Commission keeps the 'official' tally of motor vehicle deaths. Their 'Fatalities
Dashboard' shows the grim body count of all traffic fatalities. 2023 had the highest # of traffic fatalities ever
in Washington - 810 people killed, that 49% more than the year before the pandemic.
They also have data about 'Active Transportation' fatalities, covering people walking, riding bikes and using
wheel chairs. Again, the carnage is increasing horrendously. in 2023, WA had a record 177 Active
transportation users killed, up 54% from the 116 in 2019, the last year before the pandemic.
Over that same time period, WA state population increased by just 3.67%. Road deaths are up way more
than population has increased.
7
You can look at just Kitsap County, where traffic fatalities in each of the past two years were higher than any
year since at least 2014.
And if you look at just Bremerton, we had a record year in 2022 and tied the previous record in 2023.
What about WHERE the crashes are happening. Washington State Patrol has 'unofficial' but much more
detailed data about where the deaths are occuring. A/nd they look at not just deaths but 'serious injury
crashes.' You can find that detailed information here. Go to 'Query' and wade thru the many options (it's not
super intuitive) then 'Select Output Map' at the very bottom - and you can make your own map.
8
Here's 10-year citywide fatalty locations.
9
Here's a map of all the 'Serious Injury' accidents in the past 10 years.
10
Close-up of those for Central Bremerton - Warren and Kitsap Way remain horribly dangrous, with additional
hotspots on 6th Street and on Naval, the most dangerous zones are the big intersections, 6th and 11th.
11
Here's a closeup of District 1, those are 'Serious Injury Collisions'.
12
Here's all traffic accidents in 2024. Pine Rd is a hotspot for traffic accidents, it's only a matter of time before
that busy, no-sidewalk street kills someone.
In summation, we're in the midst of an epidemic of traffic deaths. Bremerton is spending millions on street
projects, but recently completed projects, including Kitsap Way and the Manette Roundabout, we far from
modern safety standards, and will do nothing to curb these tragic numbers.
I hope we can count on your support to stop the city from building more mediocre projects, and start turning
the corner on these street tragedies.
Thank you,
Travis
Published for
January 22
Study Session
Item B9
Public Comments
From: Kate Kourbatova <katekourbatova@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2025 8:54 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Supplemental Agreement No. 4 with HDR Engineering, Inc. for the Naval Ave: 1st
Street to 15th Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Enhancements Project
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I'd like to add, after listening to the discussion at tonight's city council meeting, that I was
disappointed to see that the plans were based on the assumption that the main mode of
transportation to the shipyard in 2040-2050 would still be cars, and therefore reducing the
number of car lanes to make more room for bikes and pedestrians isn't even possible to
consider. I'd like us to aim for much more use of other modes of transportation in downtown
Bremerton over the next 25 years. Making driving slightly less convenient while making other
options safer and easier is a great tradeoff.
From: Kate Kourbatova katekourbatova@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2025 5:31 PM
To: City Council City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Subject: Supplemental Agreement No. 4 with HDR Engineering, Inc. for the Naval Ave: 1st
Street to 15th Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Enhancements Project
Esteemed City Council members,
Please vote to Deny the motion to approve the agreement as-is. The plan needs further
revisions to improve safety for bicyclists (and I say this as a driver, who would love to also
be able to safely ride my bike around town).
We need to prioritize infrastructure that allows more people in Bremerton to have options to get
around town without using their cars. This is vitally important, both in terms of us enjoying our
beautiful public spaces in Kitsap, but also in the context of climate change. We are currently
cornered into being reliant on cars, and therefore on fossil fuels. I would love to live in a future
where my family can just use our car for long trips, and easily and safely bike and walk ar ound
town for most errands.
Thank you,
Ekaterina (Kate) Kourbatova
1123 Scott Ave
Bremerton WA 98310
From: Reama Schuldt reama.schuldt@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2025 9:26 AM
To: Vicki Grover Vicki.Grover@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Cc: City Council City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us; The Schuldts theschuldtfamily@gmail.com;
Greg Wheeler Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Thomas Knuckey
Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Ned Lever Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Travis
Merrigan bikebremerton@gmail.com; Michael Goodnow
Michael.Goodnow@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Jane Rebelowski
Jane.Rebelowski@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Anna Mockler Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Subject: Re: Citizen Comments - Naval Avenue Project (Reama Schuldt)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Vicki,
Good meeting last night.
There's one thing that is still itching my brain.
Can you send over a list of outreach that has happened on this project?
Again, people are asking me why they don't know about it and I'd love to be able to say, "They
sent a mailer on these days. They walked the neighborhood these days. They held open houses
these days."
I hope one takeaway is that virtual open houses on projects this important, especially since we
were all back to in-person meetings in 2023, is not enough. That said, we did talk with Ned last
night about that as a possibility so that people are informed on the project.
I also suggest a walking/rolling tour of the plans with neighbors that need to see it and feel it to
understand the project better.
As I said last night, residents need buy in on projects that take their property. We don't want an
us/them situation and bitterness because they weren't informed until the 11th hour.
Having an open house at Naval Elementary would be a strong move and I can talk with the
principal if that would be helpful.
Bremerton is better when we work together. And together we can do amazing things!
Thanks always!
Reama
From: Reama Schuldt reama.schuldt@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2025 11:04 PM
To: Vicki Grover Vicki.Grover@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Cc: City Council City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us; The Schuldts theschuldtfamily@gmail.com;
Greg Wheeler Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Thomas Knuckey
Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Ned Lever Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Travis
Merrigan bikebremerton@gmail.com; Michael Goodnow
Michael.Goodnow@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Jane Rebelowski
Jane.Rebelowski@ci.bremerton.wa.us; Anna Mockler Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us
Subject: Re: Citizen Comments - Naval Avenue Project (Reama Schuldt)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi everyone,
Thank you for the info shared tonight. And special thanks to Ned for hanging out after and
answering more questions in our small group outside the council chamber. The work public
works is doing is important and we're all on the same team.
I looked at the plans again tonight and realized my error, so I do apologize about the confusion
about 1507.
As usual, I'll be watching the upcoming meetings and relaying the info back to my neighbors to
the best of my ability, which fluctuates to be sure!
I know that we can get to a plan that Bremerton residents will be proud to use for the next 20
years.
The best is yet to come!
Reama
On Mon, Jan 6, 2025, 9:32 AM Vicki Grover <Vicki.Grover@ci.bremerton.wa.us> wrote:
Hi Reama,
Thank you for your inquiry about the Naval Ave. Project.
First let me answer your question for your neighbor Duke and address that immediate
concern. The project does not extend to 1507 Naval Ave. We do not plan to have any
construction activities on Naval Avenue that extend to the location/driveway of 1507.
Here is the link to the project website: https://www.bremertonwa.gov/1167/Naval-Ave-Bicycle-
Pedestrian-Enhancement. If you look at the exhibit drawing on the website located at the
bottom of the page, titled “Naval Avenue Preliminary Design Exhibit” you can see the project
limits do not extend to 1507 Naval Ave.
The Right of Way phase of the project which includes land acquisition and potential impacts to
neighbors, is anticipated to begin early this year and the city will plan to conduct a public
meeting. At this public meeting we will inform the community about the project, including
proposed right of way needs. More information on public outreach will be updated on the
project website when we have made progress towards the right of way phase of the project.
Please let me know if you have more questions or comments. Reach out to me anytime.
We appreciate your interest in this project.
Vicki Grover, P.E.
City of Bremerton, Engineering Division
345 6th Street, Suite 100
Bremerton, WA 98337
(360) 473-2317
Vicki.grover@ci.bremerton.wa.us
From: Reama Schuldt <reama.schuldt@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2024 7:35 PM
To: City Council <City.Council@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Cc: The Schuldts <theschuldtfamily@gmail.com>; Greg Wheeler
<Greg.Wheeler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Thomas Knuckey
<Thomas.Knuckey@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Ned Lever <Ned.Lever@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Vicki
Grover <Vicki.Grover@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Travis Merrigan <bikebremerton@gmail.com>;
Michael Goodnow <Michael.Goodnow@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Jane Rebelowski
<Jane.Rebelowski@ci.bremerton.wa.us>; Anna Mockler <Anna.Mockler@ci.bremerton.wa.us>
Subject: Re: Citizen Comments - Naval Avenue Project (Reama Schuldt)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello all,
Today I had a chat with Duke that lives at 1507 Naval Ave. He said he hasn't heard of the
project at all, that he wasn't aware his driveway would be used for machinery for the project,
and was very concerned with that.
Again I ask, what communication has gone out to residents along Naval about the project?
Please be specific when you share the info. I want to be sure I can advocate for the city where I
can. I'm hoping I can say, "The city sent this specific info by mail on these days," when I talk to
neighbors about the project.
Thanks again!
Reama