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.

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.

General Exemptions. The following permits or approvals are exempt from the procedures set forth in this chapter:

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.

Standard Consistency. The City reviews proposals for consistency to applicable development regulations and the Comprehensive Plan. This determination includes consideration of the following:

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Table 040 Permit Processing Procedures.

Purpose. The purpose of the preapplication conference is to acquaint the applicant with the review procedures and applicable Bremerton Municipal Code provisions to the proposal. Presubmittal application meetings are encouraged; a single meeting may be scheduled for all project permit applications related to the same project action.

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.

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

Determination. Within twenty-eight (28) days of accepting the application, the Department shall provide a written determination to the applicant, stating that:

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.

Failure to Notify. Failure to provide a written determination within the required time shall automatically deem the application complete.

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) days from the date notified to submit the requested materials. Should the materials not be submitted within the time limits, the application shall expire and a new application will be required.

Incomplete Application. An incomplete application shall have sixty (60) 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 expire and a new application will be required.

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.

Review Timeline. Following the date an application is determined complete, the date shall be noted and the official review period to render a decision shall begin. The review periods for project permits are set forth in Table 090.

Table 090 Permit Review Timelines.

Timeline. The notice shall be provided within fourteen (14) days after the determination of completeness is issued.

Content. The notice of application shall include the following:

Legal Notice. Notice shall be provided in the following manner as applicable:

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.

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.

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.

Notice Integration. A notice of hearing is required for public hearings. A notice of hearing may be integrated with the notice of application.

Notice Content. A written notice of hearing shall contain the following information:

Project Permit Notification. Notification for a hearing on a project permit shall be provided in the following manner as applicable:

Notice Deadlines. Notice shall be given at least ten (10) days before the hearing date except:

Continuation of Hearing. Continued hearings do not require additional notices of hearing.

Appeal Notification. Notification for a hearing on an open-record or closed-record appeal shall be provided in the following manner:

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.

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).

Notification. Notification shall be provided in the following manner as applicable:

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.

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.

Timelines. The notice shall be issued within the time limit prescribed in BMC § 20.02.090(f), except as follows:

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.

Timeline Exclusion. The review time limits in BMC § 20.02.090(f) shall exclude any of the following:

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.

General.

Standing to Appeal. Only parties of record with standing may initiate an appeal. Standing constitutes the following:

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.

Timing of Decisions.

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.

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:

Effect. The timely filing of an administrative appeal shall stay the effective date of the decision until the appeal is either decided or withdrawn.

Notice of Appeal. The Director shall provide public notice of the appeal as provided in BMC § 20.02.110(f).

Public Meetings. All meetings of the Board shall be open to the public.

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 submittal of a complete application. 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:

Public Notice. 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.

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:

Approval. Design review approval is a Director decision; however, the Board's recommendation shall hold substantial weight. Any deviation from the Board's recommendation shall be documented in the Director's findings and conclusions.

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.

A determination of completeness, notice of hearing and a notice of decision are required pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. Review timelines per BMC § 20.02.090(g) do not apply to development agreements as they require legislative action.

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.

The City Council may approve a development agreement by ordinance or resolution only.

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.

To qualify, a project action shall:

The City Council shall designate and approve by ordinance a planned action. The ordinance:

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

For the proposals for which the City is the lead agency, the responsible official shall be the Director or their appointed designee.

For all proposals for which the City is the lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required environmental impact statement (EIS), and perform any other functions assigned to the "lead agency" or "responsible official" by those sections of the SEPA rules that were adopted by reference in this chapter.

The City shall retain all documents required by the SEPA rules (Chapter 197-11 WAC) and make them available in accordance with Chapter 42.56 RCW, Public Records Act.

The department within the City receiving an application for or initiating a proposal that involves a nonexempt action shall determine the lead agency for that proposal under WAC 197-11-050 and WAC 197-11-922 through 197-11-940, unless the lead agency has been previously determined or the department is aware that another department or agency is in the process of determining the lead agency.

When the City is the lead agency for a proposal, the department receiving the application shall refer the proposal to the responsible official, who shall supervise compliance with the threshold determination requirements, and if an EIS is necessary, shall supervise preparation of the EIS.

When the City is not the lead agency for a proposal, all departments of the City shall use and consider, as appropriate, either the DNS or the final EIS of the lead agency in making decisions on the proposal. No City department shall prepare or require preparation of a DNS or EIS in addition to that prepared by the lead agency, unless required under WAC 197-11-600. In some cases, the City may conduct supplemental environmental review under WAC 197-11-600.

If the City or any of its departments receives a lead agency determination made by another agency that appears inconsistent with the criteria of WAC 197-11-922 through 197-11-940, it may object to the determination. Any objection must be made to the agency originally making the determination and resolved within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the determination, or the City must petition the Department of Ecology for a lead agency determination under WAC 197-11-946 within the fifteen (15) day time period. Any such petition on behalf of the City may be initiated by the Director.

The City is authorized to make agreements as to lead agency status or shared lead agency duties for a proposal under WAC 197-11-942 and 197-11-944. The City may assume lead agency status in accordance with WAC 197-11-948.

In making a lead agency determination for a private project the City shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify which other agencies have jurisdiction over the proposal, i.e., which agencies require nonexempt licenses.

A final threshold determination or final EIS shall normally precede or accompany the final staff recommendation, if any, in a quasi-judicial proceeding on a nonexempt application by the Administrative Hearing Examiner.

For nonexempt legislative proposals, the DNS or draft EIS or other threshold determination and SEPA environmental documentation for the proposal shall accompany the City's staff recommendation to the appropriate advisory body, such as the Planning Commission.

If the City's only action on a proposal is a decision on a building permit or other license that requires detailed project plans and specifications, the applicant may request in writing that the City conduct environmental review prior to submission of the detailed plans and specifications.

Whenever a department within the City receives an application for a license or, in the case of governmental proposals, the department within the City initiates the proposal, the Planning Department shall determine whether the license and/or the proposal is exempt. The Planning Department's determination that a proposal is exempt shall be final and not subject to administrative review. If a proposal is exempt, none of the procedural requirements of this chapter apply to the proposal. The City shall not require completion of an environmental checklist for an exempt proposal.

In determining whether or not a proposal is exempt, the Planning Department shall make certain that the proposal is properly defined, and shall identify the governmental licenses required (WAC 197-11-060). If a proposal includes exempt and nonexempt actions, the Planning Department shall determine the lead agency even if the license application that triggers the Department's consideration is exempt.

If a proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, the City may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with the procedural requirements of this chapter, except that:

Threshold Levels for Categorical Exemptions in Bremerton, Excluding Harrison Heights. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(c) and (1)(d), cities may adopt raised levels of threshold exemptions for certain types of actions, except as provided in WAC 197-11-305 and 197-11-800(1)(a). As authorized pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(c) and (1)(d), the following threshold exemptions are adopted:

Threshold Levels for Categorical Exemptions in Harrison Heights. As authorized pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(1)(b), except as provided in WAC 197-11-305 and 197-11-800(1)(a), the following threshold exemptions are adopted. Developments greater than this scale are subject to the Harrison Heights Planned Action Ordinance No. 5401.

A completed environmental checklist (or a copy), in the form provided in WAC 197-11-960, shall be filed at the same time as an application for a permit, license, certificate or other approval not specifically exempted in this chapter; except, a checklist is not needed if the City and applicant agree an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency. The City shall use the environmental checklist to determine the lead agency and, if the City is the lead agency, for determining the responsible official and for making the threshold determination.

For private proposals, the City will require the applicant to complete the environmental checklist, providing assistance as necessary. For City proposals, the department initiating the proposal shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.

The City may require that it, and not the private applicant, will complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal, if either of the following occurs:

As provided in this section and in WAC 197-11-350, the responsible official may issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) based on conditions attached to the proposal by the responsible official or on changes to, or clarifications of, the proposal made by the applicant.

An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a DS is likely under WAC 197-11-350. The request must follow submission of a permit application and environmental checklist for a nonexempt proposal for which the department is lead agency, and precede the City's actual threshold determination for the proposal.

The responsible official should respond to the request for early notice within ten (10) working days. The response shall be written; state whether the City currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific area(s) of concern that are leading the City to consider a DS; and state that the applicant may change or clarify the proposal to mitigate the indicated impacts, revising the environmental checklist and/or permit application as necessary to reflect the changes or clarifications.

As much as possible, the City should assist the applicant with identification of impacts to the extent necessary to formulate mitigation measures.

When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal, along with a revised environmental checklist, the City shall base its threshold determination on the changed or clarified proposal and should make the determination within fifteen (15) days of receiving the changed or clarified proposal; if the City indicated specific mitigation measures in its response to the request for early notice, and the applicant changed or clarified the proposal to include those specific mitigation measures, the City shall issue and circulate a determination of nonsignificance under WAC 197-11-340(2); if the City indicated areas of concern, but did not indicate specific mitigation measures that would allow it to issue a DNS, the City shall make the threshold determination, issuing a DNS or DS as appropriate; the applicant's proposed mitigation measures (clarifications, changes or conditions) must be in writing and must be specific. For example, proposals to "control noise" or "prevent stormwater runoff" are inadequate, whereas proposals to "muffle machinery to X decibel" or "construct two hundred (200) foot stormwater retention pond at Y location" are adequate; mitigation measures which justify issuance of a mitigated DNS may be incorporated in the DNS by reference to agency staff reports, studies or other documents.

A mitigated DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2), requiring a fifteen (15) day comment period and public notice. The optional DNS process may be used in WAC 197-11-355 to combine the SEPA comment period with the notice of application comment period, if any, for the underlying permit. If a notice of application is not required for the underlying permit, the SEPA comment period shall follow issuance of the DNS and shall be concluded prior to the decision on the underlying action.

Mitigation measures incorporated in the mitigated DNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the permit decision, and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit, or enforced in any manner specifically prescribed by the City.

If the City's tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a mitigated DNS for the proposal, the City should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) (withdrawal of DNS).

The City's written response under subsection (b) of this section shall not be construed as a determination of significance. In addition, preliminary discussion of clarifications or changes to a proposal, as opposed to a written request for early notice, shall not bind the City to consider the clarification or changes in its threshold determination.

Preparation of draft and final EIS and SEIS is the responsibility of the Planning Department under the direction of the responsible official. Before the City issues an EIS, the responsible official shall be satisfied that it complies with this chapter and Chapter 197-11 WAC.

The DEIS and FEIS or draft and final SEIS shall be prepared by City staff, or by a consultant selected by the City, or the applicant, as determined by the responsible official. If the applicant is required to prepare the EIS, the applicant shall select a consultant subject to approval of the responsible official. Said individual or firm shall have demonstrated expertise relevant to the information required for the EIS. If the responsible official requires an EIS for a proposal and determines that someone other than the City will prepare the EIS, the responsible official shall notify the applicant within five (5) working days of completion of the threshold determination. The responsible official shall also notify the applicant of the City's procedure for EIS preparation, including approval of the DEIS and FEIS prior to distribution.

The City may require an applicant to provide information the City does not possess, including specific investigations. However, the applicant is not required to supply information that is not required under this chapter or that is being requested from another agency. (This does not apply to information the City may request under another ordinance or statute.)

Whenever the City issues a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2), 197-11-355 or 197-11-360(3), the City shall give public notice as follows:

Whenever the City issues a DEIS under WAC 197-11-455(5) or a SEIS under WAC 197-11-620, notice of the availability of those documents shall be given by:

Whenever possible, the City shall integrate the public notice required under this section with existing notice procedures for the City's nonexempt permit(s) or approval(s) required for the proposal.

The City may require an applicant to complete the public notice requirements for the applicant's proposal at his or her expense.

The Director shall be responsible for preparation of written comments for the City in response to a consultation request prior to a threshold determination, participation in scoping and reviewing a draft EIS.

The Director shall be responsible for the City's compliance with WAC 197-11-550 whenever the City is a consulted agency, and is authorized to develop operating procedures that will ensure that responses to consultation requests are prepared in a timely fashion and include data from all appropriate departments of the City.

The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to those in the existing SEPA authorization of the City.

The City may attach conditions to a permit or approval for a proposal so long as:

The City may deny a permit or approval for a proposal on the basis of SEPA so long as:

The City designates and adopts by reference the following policies as the basis for the City's exercise of authority pursuant to this section:

Applications not requiring a final decision by the City Council that are conditioned or denied on the basis of SEPA by a nonelected official shall be appealable to the Administrative Hearing Examiner pursuant to Chapter 2.13 BMC. Such appeal may be perfected by appellant by giving notice to the responsible official within fourteen (14) days of the decision being appealed. The hearing before the Hearing Examiner shall be an open-record appeal. However, the decision of the SEPA Official shall be presumed correct.

The City establishes the following administrative appeal procedures under RCW 43.21C.075 and WAC 197-11-680:

The City shall give official notice under WAC 197-11-680(5) whenever it issues a permit or approval for which a statute or ordinance establishes a time limit for commencing judicial appeal.

The City, applicant for, or proponent of an action may publish a notice of action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080 for any action.

The form of the notice shall be substantially in the form provided in WAC 197-11-990. The notice shall be published by the City Clerk, applicant or proponent pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080.

The Director shall designate environmentally sensitive areas under the standards of WAC 197-11-908, and shall file maps designating such areas, together with the exemptions from the list in WAC 197-11-908 that are inapplicable in such areas, with the Planning Department and the Department of Ecology, Headquarters Office, Olympia, Washington. The environmentally sensitive area designations shall have full force and effect of law as of the date of filing.

The City shall treat proposals located wholly or partially within an environmentally sensitive area no differently than other proposals under this chapter, making a threshold determination for all such proposals. The City shall not automatically require an EIS for a proposal merely because it is proposed for location in an environmentally sensitive area.

Certain exemptions do not apply on lands covered by water, and this remains true regardless of whether or not lands covered by water are mapped.