Ordinance No. 2024-28 BIMC Chapter 2.16 Amendments 4895-2890-9011 v.10 (Approved 121024)
Page 1/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-28 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Bainbridge Island, Washington, relating to the
regulation of the administrative land use procedures, repealing and replacing Sections
2.16.020 and 2.16.040 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code (BIMC); providing for
severability; and establishing an effective date.
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 Bainbridge Island complies with Section 8 of SB 5290,
subsections 1(b), (c), and (j) by (i) imposing reasonable fees on applications, (ii) entering into an
interlocal agreement with Bainbridge Island Fire District to share permitting staff and resources,
and (iii) adopting new code provisions to include a meeting with applicants to resolve outstanding
issues during the review process; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the permit review timeline data collected to
date, and determined that to comply with provisions of SB 5290, and implement longer permit
review timelines than the “safe harbor” review timelines set forth in SB 5290, revisions to
Bainbridge Island Municipal Code Chapter 2.16 are necessary; and
WHEREAS, City staff have prepared revisions, attached to this Ordinance as Exhibits A,
B, and C to bring the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code Sections 2.16.020 and 2.16.040 into
compliance with SB 5290 (SB 5290 Code Amendments); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 7 of SB 5290, the City desires to adopt longer permit
review timelines to account for the time it takes to coordinate with multiple other governmental
agencies to adequately consider the City’s unique environmental factors as well as to implement
the City’s robust stakeholder engagement process; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bainbridge Island notified the Washington State Department of
Commerce on October 3, 2024, of the City’s intent to adopt development regulations for the
purposes of Commerce’s review and no comments or objections were received; and
WHEREAS, the Bainbridge Island Planning Commission held two work sessions to study
the SB 5290 Code Amendments on July 25, 2024 and September 26, 2024, and a duly-noticed
Page 2/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
public hearing on October 10, 2024, and recommended adoption of the amendments as drafted;
and
WHEREAS, the Bainbridge Island City Council considered the Planning Commission’s
recommendation at the regularly scheduled business meeting of November 12, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the Bainbridge Island City Council finds that this permit processing and
procedures ordinance allows for the Planning and Community Development Department to fulfill
the requirements of the Washington State Legislature while providing excellent customer service
and predictable permitting timelines.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAINBRIDGE
ISLAND, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Bainbridge Island City Council adopts the above recitals, together with
the content of Agenda Bill AB-475-2024 as legislative findings in support of this ordinance.
Section 2. Section 2.16.020 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby repealed
in its entirety and replaced as shown on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference.
Section 3. Section 2.16.040 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby repealed
in its entirety and replaced as shown on Exhibit B, which is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference.
Section 4. Should any section, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance, or
its application to any person or circumstance, be declared unconstitutional or otherwise invalid
for any reason, or should any portion of this ordinance be preempted by state or federal law or
regulation, such decision or preemption shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of
this ordinance or its application to other persons or circumstances.
Section 5. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical
errors; references to other local, state, or federal laws, codes, rules or regulations; or ordinance
numbering and section/subsection numbering.
Section 6. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force beginning January 1, 2025.
PASSED by the City Council this 10th day of December 2024.
APPROVED by the Mayor this 10th day of December 2024.
Page 3/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
Joe Deets, Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE:
Christine Brown, MMC, City Clerk
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: November 8, 2024
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: December 10, 2024
PUBLISHED: December 13, 2024
EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 2025
ORDINANCE NUMBER: 2024-28
Exhibit A
Page 4/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
BIMC 2.16.020
A. Jurisdiction. Jurisdiction of the department director or the hearing examiner is limited to those issues where
ordinance or other appropriate authority grants the authority to issue a decision, recommendation, or issue an order.
B. State Environmental Policy Act May Apply. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the Bainbridge
Island SEPA ordinance (Chapter 16.04 BIMC) may also apply to applications processed under this section. For a
consolidated land use application subject to Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter 16.04 BIMC, the SEPA threshold
determination shall be issued and any required public comment period shall be completed prior to a public hearing.
C. Types of Land Use Applications. Land use applications are classified into four major categories based on the
review process: (1) administrative, (2) quasi-judicial decisions by a hearing examiner, (3) quasi-judicial decisions by
city council, and (4) legislative approvals. The specific types of applications in each category are shown in the table
in BIMC 2.16.010.
1. Administrative land use decisions are made by a department director pursuant to the process in BIMC
2.16.030, and pursuant to specific standards in BIMC 2.16.040 through 2.16.090 as applicable.
2. Quasi-judicial decisions by a hearing examiner are made pursuant to the process in BIMC 2.16.100, and
pursuant to specific standards in BIMC 2.16.110 through 2.16.120 as applicable.
3. Quasi-judicial decisions by city council are made pursuant to the process in BIMC 2.16.130, and pursuant to
specific standards in BIMC 2.16.140 through 2.16.160 as applicable. This category includes consolidated
project review, which is an option available for a land use proposal that requires more than one related land use
permit, and in which decisions are made pursuant to BIMC 2.16.170. In some cases, consolidated project
reviews may be quasi-judicial decisions by a hearing examiner.
4. Legislative approvals are non-site-specific decisions related to land use in the city but not related to a
specific land use application filed by a property owner. These decisions are made pursuant to BIMC 2.16.180,
and pursuant to specific standards in BIMC 2.16.180 through 2.16.210 as applicable.
D. Who Can Apply.
1. A property owner, a contract purchaser, or an agent of the owner with authorized written proof of agency
may apply for any type of permit.
2. A resident who is not the owner of the dwelling may apply for permits and licenses pertaining to a home
occupation.
3. Any person may request an interpretation of the zoning code, shoreline master program, or subdivision
regulations. The director of planning and community development may issue interpretations of the zoning code,
shoreline master program, or subdivision regulations as needed, and shall post issued interpretations on the city
website.
E. Prohibited Ex Parte Communications.
1. Except as permitted under Chapter 42.36 RCW, a proponent or opponent, or his or her agent or
representative, of a quasi-judicial matter that is pending before the hearing examiner or council, shall not
communicate ex parte, directly or indirectly, with the examiner or a council member concerning the merits of
the pending matter or a factually related quasi-judicial matter. This rule shall not prohibit ex parte
communications concerning procedural matters.
2. Except as permitted under Chapter 42.36 RCW, the hearing examiner or a council member shall not
communicate ex parte, directly or indirectly, with a proponent or opponent, or his or her agent or
representative, of a quasi-judicial matter that is pending before the hearing examiner or council concerning the
merits of the pending matter or a factually related quasi-judicial matter. This rule shall not prohibit ex parte
communications concerning procedural matters.
Page 5/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
3. If a prohibited ex parte communication is made to or by the hearing examiner or a council member, the
examiner or council member shall comply with Chapter 42.36 RCW. Any violation of this subsection E shall
be deemed a misdemeanor and may be punished pursuant to Chapter 1.24 BIMC.
4. Any person seeking to rely on the provisions of this section to disqualify the hearing examiner or a council
member from participating in a decision must raise the challenge as soon as the basis for disqualification is
made known to the person. Where the basis is known or reasonably should have been known prior to the
issuance of the decision and is not raised until after the issuance of the decision, it may not be relied on to
invalidate the decision.
F. Design Review Board Review.
1. The design review board shall review and make recommendations on all land use applications as set forth in
this section. This design process reflects a collaborative effort between an applicant, the design review board,
and the community to better incorporate the vision of the city as outlined in the adopted design standards and
guidelines.
2. Subsequent to submittal of preapplication materials, the board shall review a proposal for conformance with
applicable design standards and guidelines. The board’s written recommendations shall be included in the staff
report transmitted to the planning commission.
3. A board recommendation is not a decision and there is no city appeal of the recommendation.
G. Zoning Verification Letter. Applicants may request a zoning verification letter. A zoning verification letter is
intended to provide to an applicant information related to the subject property, including related to legal land uses,
zoning, zoning district standards, development history, and compliance.
H. Consultation. Applicants may request and participate in an informal 30-minute meeting prior to a formal
preapplication meeting or application submittal. The purpose of the consultation is to discuss in general terms
project permit application questions. Staff will not prepare for the consultation, nor will they produce any written or
electronic documentation of the discussions. It is the applicant’s responsibility to take notes. As no project permit
application will have been submitted at the time of such a meeting, the city will not make any binding commitments.
I. Preapplication Procedure.
1. Subject to certain exemptions, all projects are subject to and must complete the site assessment review
process set forth and in accordance with Chapter 15.19 BIMC, and projects requiring a preapplication
conference have the option of proceeding with the two processes concurrently. Chapter 15.19 BIMC is
designed to ensure that future development integrates low impact development practices to the maximum
extent practicable, as required by Chapters 15.19 and 15.20 BIMC.
2. The preapplication conference is an informal discussion between a potential applicant and city staff. A
preapplication conference shall not include extensive field inspection or correspondence. The purpose of the
preapplication conference is to assist the applicant by identifying the following:
a. Requirements for submittal, including types of permits necessary to complete the proposal and whether
SEPA review is required, pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW.
b. Compliance with applicable city plans, goals, policies, codes or guidelines and possible revisions to the
proposed project that will enhance the proposal with respect to these requirements.
c. Required plans, studies, reports, and/or other materials specific to the proposal that will provide
necessary information for staff to review the project.
d. Whether or not the project will likely qualify as a housing design demonstration project, and/or
feedback about how to qualify, if applicable.
Page 6/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
3. A preapplication conference may be recommended by the department director for any type of land use
application that the director believes may be complex or controversial, but is required prior to submitting an
application for the following land use applications unless a waiver is obtained pursuant to this subsection I.3:
a. Minor or major conditional use;
b. Minor or major variance;
c. Minor or major site plan and design review approval;
d. Preliminary long subdivision and short subdivision;
e. Shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline variance, and shoreline conditional use permit;
f. Shoreline substantial development exemption for new shoreline armoring (including bulkheads,
revetments, and soft shore designs);
g. Comprehensive plan amendment;
h. Reasonable use exception;
i. Consolidated project review; and
j. Major critical area permit.
4. Except in the case of (a) preliminary short subdivisions and long subdivisions, or (b) shoreline substantial
development exemptions or permits for new shoreline armoring (including bulkheads, revetments, and soft
shore designs), or (c) where the HDDP process is being used, or (d) where DRB review is required, a
preapplication conference may be waived in writing by the director if the director determines the following:
a. The application is consistent with applicable codes and ordinances;
b. The proposed use is clearly listed as a permitted use or a conditional use in the zoning district in which
it is located; and
c. The applicant demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the city’s permit processing procedures.
As an additional basis for such a waiver, a preapplication conference may be waived in writing by the director
if the director determines that the applicant has attended a consultation meeting within one year of their
preapplication meeting, and the director determines that the applicant is in compliance with subsections I.4.a
through c of this section.
5. Applications requiring design review board review shall be first reviewed at a department-facilitated
preapplication conference and followed up by a summary letter that provides application submittal
requirements, as described in this section. The applicant shall then meet with the design review board to discuss
the design concept and proceed through the design review process.
The preapplication conference application shall be provided to the design review board and the planning
commission. Up to two members of the design review board and the planning commission may attend the
preapplication conference with the intent of listening and reporting the proposal to the full design review board
and planning commission at a subsequent meeting.
6. The review process for long subdivisions, major site plan and design review permits, and major conditional
use permits shall include a public participation meeting following the procedures outlined in Resolution No.
2021-07. The meeting will be held after the design review board concept review, during the project proposal
phase.
Page 7/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
7. An applicant shall arrange for a preapplication conference by submitting forms and plans as required in the
administrative manual, and the Design for Bainbridge appendices where design review is required.
8. The discussion at the preapplication conference shall not bind or prohibit the city’s future application or
enforcement of applicable codes and ordinances.
J. Application.
1. Application Submittal Requirements.
a. An application for a specific type of land use decision shall be filed with the appropriate department on
the specific forms prescribed by that department and shall include fees as required by resolution of the city
council. Each application has specific submittal requirements that are described set forth in the
administrative manual, which is incorporated by reference within the application. Additional requirements
may be requested on the application form.
b. The address indicated on the application shall be, for the purposes of this title, the mailing address of
the applicant, and all correspondence relating to the application shall be directed to that address.
c. The applicant or designated representative must be present at any public meeting that has been publicly
advertised to hear the application or when the applicant has been personally notified of such a meeting.
d. The director may waive specific submittal requirements determined to be unnecessary for review of an
application.
e. The director or city engineer may require additional material such as, but not limited to, maps, studies or
models when the director determines such material is needed to accurately assess the proposed project or
studies either at the time of notice of completeness or subsequently if new information is required to
adequately assess the proposed project, or substantial changes in the proposed project occur, as determined
by the director.
2. Determination of Complete Application.
a. A land use application shall be deemed procedurally complete when all submittal requirements and all
required fees as set forth in the administrative manual or by resolution of the city council have been
submitted to the appropriate department and staff has confirmed that the level of detail in submitted
materials is sufficient to allow accurate review, even though additional information may be required or
subsequent project modifications may occur.
b. The written determination shall be issued in accordance with see subsection L.4 of this section and shall
follow the procedures of subsection M.3 for timelines.
cb. A determination of a complete application shall not preclude the department director from requesting
additional information or studies, if new information is required to complete final review or if substantial
changes in the application are proposed.
dc. If a land use application is determined to be incomplete, the city shall return the application for
modification or correction with a request in writing for the missing information. The applicant shall
respond to such a request within 60 days of the date of the request.
3. Voiding Application Due to Inactivity. A land use application for which a decision has not yet been made
may be canceled for inactivity if the city returns the application for modification or correction (including a
request for additional information for an incomplete or complete application) and the applicant fails to respond
to the city’s request within 60 days of the request. The planning director may extend the response period
beyond 60 days if within that time period the applicant provides and subsequently adheres to an approved
schedule with specific target dates for submitting the full revisions, corrections, or other information needed by
the requesting department.
Page 8/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
K. Fees.
1. Fees and charges payable to the city prior to issuance of a land use permit or approval application, except
impact fees, shall be paid in an amount established by ordinance or resolution as of the date on which the land
use application is accepted, except as provided in subsections K.2 and 3 of this section.
2. Fees and charges payable to the city prior to the issuance of a building permit, including utility participation
and connection charges, but except impact fees and fees for which an hourly charge has been established, shall
be paid in an amount established by ordinance or resolution as of the date of the permit application.
3. Fees and charges payable to the city in relation to the issuance of land use permits or approvals do not vest
except as provided in this chapter. Hourly rate charges shall be imposed for all work done by the city on and
after the effective date(s) of the hourly charges, at the rate in effect on the date that work is performed by the
city. Hourly charges shall be in addition to any amounts previously collected relative to the permits, approvals,
or actions for which hourly fees are either now or subsequently imposed except that amounts paid prior to the
imposition of hourly charges shall be considered a nonrefundable deposit against future charges for the same
permits or approvals.
L. Application Time Frames.
1. Final decisions on land use applications should be issued within 120 days from the date the application is
determined to be complete pursuant to subsection J.2 of this section, except in the case of subdivisions. A
preliminary plat for a short subdivision, long subdivision or large lot subdivision must be approved,
disapproved, or returned to the applicant for modification or correction within 90 days from the date of filing a
complete application, unless the applicant consents to an extension. A final plat for a short subdivision, long
subdivision, or large lot subdivision must be approved, disapproved, or returned to the applicant for
modification or correction within 30 days from the date of filing a complete application, unless the applicant
consents to an extension.
1. Time Periods for Issuing Final Decisions.
a. Except as otherwise established herein, decisions for permits requiring Administrative Approvals (those
permits listed under the “Administrative Approval column in BIMC Table 2.16.010-1) must be issued a final
decision by the city within 90 days of the determination of completeness pursuant to subsection J.2.
b. Except as otherwise established herein, decisions for permits requiring Quasi-Judicial Decisions by the
Hearing Examiner (those permits listed under the Quasi-Judicial Decision by the Hearing Examiner column in
BIMC Table 2.16.010-1) must be issued a final decision by the city within 120 days of the determination of
completeness pursuant to subsection J.2.
c. The time periods established in BIMC 2.16.020.L.1.a and b above shall be extended as follows:
i. if the permit requires SEPA review, then the time period for issuing a final decision shall be
extended an additional 45 days;
ii. if a permit requires review by the Planning Commission, then the time period for issuing a final
decision shall be extended an additional 60 days;
iii if the permit is for a property within shoreline jurisdiction, the time period for issuing a final
decision shall be extended an additional 90 days.
d. The time periods established in BIMC 2.16.020.L.1.a and b do not apply to the issuance of subdivisions.
Pursuant to state law, a preliminary plat for a short subdivision, long subdivision or large lot subdivision must
be approved, disapproved, or returned to the applicant for modification or correction within 90 days from the
date of filing a complete application, unless the applicant consents to an extension. A final plat for a short
subdivision, long subdivision, or large lot subdivision must be approved, disapproved, or returned to the
Page 9/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
applicant for modification or correction within 30 days from the date of filing a complete application, unless
the applicant consents to an extension.
2. Where there is a conflict in time periods of state statutes, the state statute with the more restrictive time
period shall govern. The time period for making a final decision as established by this section may be extended
for any reasonable period of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city.
3. For purposes of calculating time periods and counting days of permit processing, the time period shall begin
on the first day following the date the application is determined to be complete. The following periods shall be
excluded from the time periods established in subsection L.1 of this section-day period:
a. Any period during which an application has been returned for correction or modification with a written
request for missing or additional information necessary for review, in accordance with subsection J.2 of
this section and including the day when responsive information is resubmitted by the applicant; or
b. Any period during which an environmental impact statement is being prepared following a
determination of significance pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW; or
c. Any period during which the property owner is required to bring their property into code compliance
following the issuance of a stop work order or a notice of violation for a violation that directly relates to
actions permitted under the underlying permit or requires corrective action that impacts the underlying
permit; or
d. Any period during which investigation or decision by other governmental agencies is required; or
e. Any period during which an appeal of a project permit is being reviewed after an administrative appeal
is filed until the administrative appeal is resolved and any additional time period provided by the
administrative appeal has expired; and or
fd. Any period after an applicant informs the city, in writing, that they would like to temporarily suspend
review of the project permit application until the time that the applicant notifies the city, in writing, that
they would like to resume the application. The city may set conditions for the temporary suspension of a
permit application extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city.
4. The time limits periods established by this section do not apply in the event of any of the following if a land
use application includes one of the following:
a. An amendment to the comprehensive plan or an amendment to a land use development regulation is
proposed, or required for approval; or
b. A application requires approval of the Ssiting of an essential public facility as provided in RCW
36.70A.200; or
c. An application substantially revised by the applicant, in which case the time period shall start from the
date at which the revised project application is determined to be complete under subsection J.2 of this
section The time period to process a permit must start over if an applicant proposed a change in use that
adds or removes commercial or residential elements from the original application that would make the
application fail to meet the determination of procedural completeness for the new use; or
d. If, at any time, an applicant informs the city, in writing, that the applicant would like to temporarily
suspend the review of their project for more than 60 days, or if an applicant is not responsive for more
than 60 consecutive days after the city has notified the applicant, in writing, that additional information is
required to further process their application, an additional 30 days may be added to the time periods for the
city’s action to issue a final decision for each type of project permit that is subject to this Chapter; or
e. An application for a street or right-of-way vacation.
Page 10/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
5. If the city is unable to issue its final decision on a land use application within the applicable time periods, the
city shall provide written notice of this fact to the project applicant. The notice will include a statement of
reasons why the time periods have not been met and an estimated date for issuance of the notice of final
decision.
6. The city may issue a decision after three requests for the same additional information have remained
unaddressed by materials submitted by the applicant. To issue a decision under this subsection, the city must
attempt to schedule a meeting within 14 days of the second request for corrections. If the applicant fails to
respond to the request for a meeting, or if the meeting cannot resolve the issues, the city shall proceed with a
third request for additional information or corrections. Upon receiving the additional information, the city must
approve or deny the application. The intent of this provision is to allow the city to issue a decision when the
content of submittal materials demonstrates an inability or unwillingness to meet applicable code requirements
after repeated requests by the city. It is not the intent of this section to limit good faith efforts to meet code
requirements by submitting new information in pursuit of approval.
M. Notice Requirements.
1. Land Use Notice Summary Table.
[1] Additional noticing may be required by other titles of the BIMC.
* May be combined with SEPA notice.
** Notice only goes to parties that commented during the public comment period and any agencies with jurisdiction.
2. Exemptions from Public Notice Requirements on Land Use Decisions. The following land use applications
do not require a notice of application and public comment period or notice of decision:
a. A building permit or other construction permit.
b. An administrative decision that is categorically exempt under SEPA (Chapter 43.21C RCW), unless the
permit application procedures require a public comment period or public hearing. Flexible lot design short
or long plats are not exempt from notice requirements.
3. Notice of Complete Land Use Decision Application.
a. Within 28 days after receiving a land use permit application, the department director shall provide to the
applicant a written determination, stating either that the application is complete or that the application is
incomplete and what is necessary to make the application complete. If the application is determined to be
incomplete, the department director will request additional information in writing.:
i. the application is complete; or
Page 11/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
ii. the application is incomplete and that the procedural submission requirements have not been
met. The determination of incompleteness shall outline what steps are necessary to make the application
procedurally complete. The determination of incompleteness will also state that if the applicant is not
responsive, pursuant to RCW 36.70B.080, for more than 60 consecutive days after the city has notified the
applicant that additional information is required to further process the application, an additional 30 days
may be added to the time periods for the city’s action to issue a final decision for each type of project
permit applicable to the project permit application.
b. The determination of completeness may include or be combined with the following as optional
information:
i. A preliminary determination of those development regulations that will be used for
project mitigation;
ii. A preliminary determination of consistency, as provided under RCW 36.70B.040;
iii. Other information the director or their designee chooses to include; or
iv. The notice of application pursuant to the requirements in RCW 36.70B.110.
cb. Within 14 days after an applicant has submitted all additional information identified by the department
director as being necessary for a complete application, the department director shall notify the applicant
whether the application is complete or what additional information is necessary.
dc. If the department director does not provide a written determination as to whether the application is
complete within the 28 days, the application shall be deemed complete as of the twenty-eighth ninth day.
4. Notice of Application and Public Comment Period.
a. Time of Notice. Within 14 days of a notice of complete application, the department director shall issue a
notice of application for any land use application except for those applications that are exempted pursuant
to subsection M.2 of this section. The notice of application shall provide a minimum comment period of
21 days. However, for projects requiring review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the
notice of application shall provide a minimum comment period of 14 days; the SEPA threshold
determination shall not be issued prior to the expiration of the notice of application comment period.
b. Method of Notice. The notice of application shall be provided to the public and other government
agencies with jurisdiction over some aspect of the application by the following means:
i. Distributing written notice to property owners at addresses listed on the property tax records of
Kitsap County within 500 feet of any boundary of the subject property and including any property
within 500 feet of any contiguous property in the applicant’s ownership;
ii. Posting notice in the official posting places of the city, including the city website;
iii. Publishing notice in the official newspaper of the city;
iv. Posting the subject property in a manner prescribed by the city; and
v. Distributing notices to government agencies.
c. Notice of Application Contents. The content of the notice shall comply with the requirements of state
law and shall contain that information set forth in the administrative manual.
d. Transportation Notice. If the application is for a short subdivision or a large lot subdivision that is
adjacent to the right-of-way of a state highway or within two miles of the boundary of a state or municipal
airport, not later than 10 days after the short subdivision application is filed, the director shall provide a
Page 12/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
notice of the application, including a legal description and location map, to the State Secretary of
Transportation. The Department of Transportation shall, within 15 days after receiving the notice, submit a
statement to the director who furnished the notice, including any information that the Department of
Transportation deems to be relevant about the effect of the proposed short subdivision or large lot
subdivision upon the legal access to the state highway, the traffic carrying capacity of the state highway
and the safety of the users of the state highway. If comments are not received within 15 days, the director
may extend the comment period by an additional 15 days to allow for Department of Transportation
comments.
5. Notice of Public Hearing. Notice for an application requiring a public hearing shall be provided in the
following manner:
a. Time of Notice. The hearing examiner shall provide notice of the public hearing at least 15 days prior to
the hearing or as otherwise provided by law.
b. Method of Notice. The hearing examiner shall provide notice of an appeal hearing as provided in this
subsection and shall provide public notice for any other public hearing by:
i. Posting notice in the official posting places of the city, including the city website; and
ii. Publishing notice in the official newspaper of the city at least 14 days prior to the hearing or as
otherwise provided by law; and
iii. Distributing notice to the applicant and appellant, if applicable; and
iv. Distributing written notice to property owners at addresses listed on the property tax records of
Kitsap County within 500 feet of any boundary of the subject property and including any property
within 500 feet of any contiguous property in the applicant’s ownership; and
v. Distributing notice to any person who has submitted a written request for notice of the hearing; and
vi. Posting the subject property in a manner prescribed by the city.
c. Public Hearing Notice Contents. The content of the notice shall comply with the requirements of state
law and shall contain that information set forth in the administrative manual.
6. Notice of Land Use Decision and Appeal Period. A notice of decision shall be issued upon a final decision
on a land use application. The decision-maker shall distribute the notice of decision to the applicant, the
applicable department director and any persons requesting notice or submitting comments on the application
prior to the decision. Notice of decision shall include:
a. A statement indicating that the application is approved, approved with conditions, denied, or remanded;
and
b. A statement of any conditions included as part of a decision for approval or approval with conditions;
and
c. A statement of facts upon which the decision, including any conditions, is based and the conclusions of
law derived from those facts; and
d. The SEPA threshold determination and mitigation conditions as specified in Chapter 16.04 BIMC, if
applicable; and
e. Procedures for appeal under subsection R of this section if applicable.
7. Combining Public Notices on Land Use Applications. If a land use application is subject to environmental
review under Chapter 16.04 BIMC (Chapter 43.21C RCW) and requires a SEPA threshold determination, the
Page 13/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
SEPA public notice and notice of SEPA public comment period, if any, shall be combined with other land use
application notices when possible. A combined notice shall include a statement that a single comment letter
may be submitted to the SEPA official, addressing impacts as well as other issues subject to review under the
decision criteria for the land use application.
8. Notice Required for Legislative Review Procedures. Unless subsection M.9 or 10 of this section requires
otherwise, notice of the date, time and place of any scheduled hearing shall be provided to the public by the
following means:
a. Publishing notice in the official newspaper of the city at least 10 calendar days prior to the public
hearing.
b. Posting notice in the official posting places of the city.
9. Notice Required for Adoption and Amendment of Land Use Regulations.
a. The city shall give notice of the public hearing in a way that is reasonably calculated to provide notice
to property owners and other affected and interested individuals, tribes, government agencies, businesses,
and organizations. Examples of reasonable notice include:
i. Posting the property for site-specific proposals;
ii. Publishing notice in the official newspaper of the city;
iii. Notifying public or private groups who have notified the city of an interest in a certain proposal or
in the type of proposal being considered.
b. Notice of the public hearing shall state when the public may submit written comments on the proposed
development regulation; provided, that the public shall be given at least 10 days prior to the scheduled
public hearing to submit written comments to the city.
c. Errors in exact compliance with this chapter shall not render the development regulation invalid if the
spirit of the procedures established by this chapter is observed.
10. Notice Required for Special Area Plan Process. The interdepartmental staff team described in BIMC
2.16.210.D shall provide notice to the public of the initial public meeting by (a) mailing notice, by regular mail,
at least 10 days prior to the date of the meeting, to all interested persons and groups identified by the
interdepartmental staff team, and to all persons requesting such notice; and (b) publishing notice in the city’s
official newspaper at least 10 days prior to the date of the meeting.
N. Land Dedication. The following provisions apply to applications for short or long subdivisions, and to
development permits for multifamily residential development.
1. The applicant shall submit with the application (a) a proposal for dedication of land for any public rights-of-
way and parks, open spaces, or recreational lands required to serve the proposed development, and (b) any
proposed open space covenants for private parks or recreational facilities for which the applicant seeks
approval. Those proposals shall be incorporated in the underlying application.
2. Except in the case of short subdivisions, the city council shall then determine whether to require the
dedication of land, and/or approve any proposed open space covenants for private parks or recreational
activities. In the case of short subdivisions, staff shall determine whether to require dedication of land and/or
approve any proposed open space covenants for private parks or recreational activities, but no required land
dedication shall be final until accepted by city council.
3. In the instances where staff or the city council determines to require dedication of land, the dedication shall
occur:
Page 14/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
a. In the case of a short or long subdivision, at the time of final plat approval;
b. In the case of development permits for multifamily development, land dedications of public rights-of-
way shall be required at the time of approval of the earliest application at which the number of dwelling
units and related traffic generation from the property can be calculated. Land dedications for parks, open
spaces, and recreational lands shall be due at the time of approval of the earliest application at which the
number of dwelling units on the property can be calculated. All land dedications shall be completed prior
to the issuance of any building permits.
O. Time Limits and Extensions.
1. A land use permit automatically expires and is void if the applicant fails to file for a building permit or other
necessary development permit within three years of the effective date of the permit unless (a) the applicant has
received an extension for the permit; or (b) the permit provides for an extended time period.
2. The director may grant one extension to the permit, in writing, for a period not to exceed one year if:
a. Unforeseen circumstances or conditions necessitate the extension of the permit; and
b. Termination of the permit would result in unreasonable hardship to the applicant, and the applicant is
not responsible for the delay; and
c. The extension of the permit will not cause substantial detriment to existing uses in the immediate
vicinity of the subject property; and
d. The extension request is received by the department no later than 30 days prior to the expiration of the
permit.
P. Required Notices on Title. Where any provision of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code requires the recording
of a notice on title related to a land condition or land use approval condition, the applicant shall record those notices
in the form shown in the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code or administrative manual. In the case of long, short, or
large lot subdivisions, the notice shall be recorded prior to or at the recording of the final plat. In the case of other
approvals, the notice shall be recorded before the issuance of any building permit related to the approval.
Q. Approval Binding. No person, firm or corporation shall locate or expand a use for which any land use approval is
required without first obtaining that land use approval. Once a land use application has been approved, no building
or development of any sort shall occur contrary to the approved land use application unless this title includes a
procedure for adjustments or modifications and the city has approved those adjustments or modifications.
R. Appeals.
1. Appeal of an Administrative Review Decision.
a. Applicability. All administrative decisions, departmental rulings and interpretations made in accordance
with administrative review procedures of BIMC 2.16.030 and administrative decisions made under BIMC
1.26.070 may be appealed to a hearing examiner. Administrative decisions of the public works director
and decisions on sign permits may not be appealed to the hearing examiner.
b. SEPA Appeals. Appeals of decisions made in accordance with Chapter 16.04 BIMC, the city’s SEPA
rules, shall be made according to the procedures in that chapter. Where the appeal concerns a substantive
approval, denial, or conditional approval of a development application based on a SEPA determination (a
“substantive SEPA appeal”), the appeal hearing shall be pursuant to subsection R.1.i of this section.
Where the appeal concerns a threshold determination regarding the applicability of SEPA or the level of
SEPA review required (a “procedural SEPA appeal”), the appeal shall also be pursuant to subsection R.1.i
Page 15/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
of this section, but, if heard on the same date, the procedural SEPA appeal shall be heard first and the
record of the proceeding closed before the substantive appeals are heard.
c. Rules. The rules of procedure adopted under BIMC 2.14.030.C.2.b shall address appeal hearings before
the hearing examiner. Such rules of procedure for appeal hearings will be published on the city’s website
and available from the office of the city clerk upon request.
d. Timing. An appeal of an administrative decision shall be filed with the city clerk within 14 days of the
date of the decision. This provision applies when the application (i) is exempt from SEPA or (ii) is subject
to SEPA and uses the “optional process.” An appeal of an administrative decision shall be filed with the
city clerk within 21 days of the date of decision when the project is subject to SEPA and requires a SEPA
threshold determination public comment period pursuant to WAC 197-11-340.
e. Written Appeal Required. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the city clerk, shall identify the
decision appealed and the date of the decision, and shall contain a summary of the grounds for the appeal.
f. Content of Appeal. Appeal hearings shall be limited to the issues specified in the written appeal.
g. Hearing Date. Following receipt of a notice of appeal and payment of the appropriate fee, a public
hearing shall be set by the hearing examiner.
h. Related Documents. All written comments and related documents received prior to the appeal hearing
shall be transmitted to the hearing examiner no later than the hearing date. In the case of complex or
controversial appeals, the city may require that some or all materials be submitted two or more days in
advance of the hearing date.
i. Appeal Hearing. As stated in RCW 43.21C.075, because a major purpose of SEPA is to combine
environmental considerations with public decisions, any appeal brought under this section shall be linked
to a specific governmental action. The State Environmental Policy Act provides a basis for challenging
whether governmental action is in compliance with the substantive and procedural provisions of this
chapter. The State Environmental Policy Act is not intended to create a cause of action unrelated to a
specific governmental action. The appeal shall be heard in accordance with RCW 43.21C.075. The appeal
shall be held at an open record public hearing. Participation in an appeal hearing is limited to the
applicant, the applicant’s representative, the appellant, the appellant’s representative, appropriate city staff
and consultants, any witnesses called by each and any nonparty who submitted written comments during
the public comment period if the hearing examiner determines that the testimony will be relevant to the
issue on appeal and nonrepetitive of the testimony of other witnesses.
i. In a SEPA procedural appeal, the procedural determination by the city’s SEPA official shall carry
substantial weight.
ii. In an appeal of a substantive decision made by the city, the criteria shall be whether (A) the
proceedings were materially affected by failure to comply with adopted procedures, or (B) the decision
is inconsistent with the BIMC criteria for that type of approval, or (C) the evidence in the record was
not adequate to support the decision.
iii. In an appeal on the substance of a SEPA determination, or substantive conditions attached to an
approval through the SEPA review process, the determination by the city’s SEPA official shall carry
substantial weight.
j. Continuation of Hearing. A hearing may be continued to a date certain without additional notice.
k. Decision. Upon completion of the appeal hearing, the hearing examiner shall (i) affirm the decision, (ii)
reverse the decision, (iii) affirm the decision with conditions, or (iv) remand the decision to the department
director for further consideration of identified issues. The decision of the director shall be accorded
substantial weight by the hearing examiner. The hearing examiner may include conditions as part of a
Page 16/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
decision granting or granting with conditions an appeal to ensure conformance with BIMC, the city’s
comprehensive plan and other applicable laws or regulations.
l. Timing of Written Decision. The hearing examiner shall issue a written decision on the appeal within 20
working days after completion of the public hearing unless the appellant and the hearing examiner have
consented to an extension of time. The written decision shall include (i) the decision of the hearing
examiner granting or denying the appeal in whole or in part; (ii) any conditions included as part of the
decision on the appeal; (iii) findings of facts upon which the decision, including any conditions, is based
and the conclusions of law derived from those facts; and (iv) a statement of the right of a person with
standing to appeal the decision of the hearing examiner in accordance with Chapter 36.70C RCW.
m. Distribution. The hearing examiner or designee body shall provide a copy of the written decision to the
applicant, the appellant, the applicable department director, and any person requesting the written decision
or who submitted substantive comments on the application prior to the decision.
2. Appeal of a Decision of the Hearing Examiner. The decision of the hearing examiner shall be final unless,
within 21 days after issuance of a decision, a person with standing appeals the decision in accordance with
Chapter 36.70C RCW or its successor.
3. Appeal of a City Council Decision on a Quasi-Judicial Matter. The decision of the city council shall be final
unless, within 21 days after issuance of a decision, a person with standing appeals the decision in accordance
with Chapter 36.70C RCW or its successor.
4. Appeals of a City Council Decision on a Legislative Matter. Appeal of a city council decision on a
development regulation, area-wide rezone and comprehensive plan amendment is governed by state law.
S. Housing Design Demonstration Projects.
1. Purpose and Goals. The purpose of this subsection S is to allow the development of housing design
demonstration projects that increase the variety of housing choices available to residents across underserved
portions of the socioeconomic spectrum, and to promote compact, low-impact development where it is most
appropriate. Further, its purpose is to encourage high quality and innovation in building design, site
development, and “green” building practices.
The goals of this program are to increase the housing supply and the choice of housing styles available in the
community; to promote socioeconomic diversity by adding to the stock of income-qualified housing; to
encourage development of smaller homes, at reasonable prices, in neighborhoods attractive to a mix of income
and age levels; and to demonstrate that innovative design and building techniques (conserving water and
energy, using sustainably sourced materials, limiting environmental impacts) are compatible with market
considerations.
2. Applicability. This subsection S is applicable to all properties located within the Winslow sanitary sewer
system service area or Winslow Subarea Plan study area, as those areas exist or are defined on the effective
date of the ordinance codified in this chapter. An application for a housing design demonstration project may
be applied to single-family residential subdivisions, mixed-use/multifamily and multifamily developments.
Since the purpose is to provide housing projects as demonstrations, the city will accept projects for
consideration and approval prior to the sunset date of the ordinance codified in this chapter. The city will limit
acceptance of projects outlined in this section to two projects after the effective date of the ordinance codified
in this chapter.
3. Review and Approval Process. Housing design demonstration project applications shall be reviewed as
specified in the same manner as other applications for the same type of underlying land use permit (see BIMC
2.16.030 through 2.16.210), with additional review steps done in the order outlined in BIMC 2.16.040 (Site
plans and design review), 2.16.070 (Short subdivisions), 2.16.110 (Major conditional use permit), 2.16.125
(Preliminary long subdivisions), and as outlined in this subsection.
Page 17/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
a. Conceptual Proposal Review. Applicants proposing a demonstration project shall meet with city staff
during the conceptual phase to discuss the goals and evaluation parameters of the proposed project. The
conceptual proposal review is an informal discussion between the applicant and city staff regarding a
proposed project. There are no required application materials for this stage. Applicants shall contact the
planning department staff to request a meeting, and the meeting shall be scheduled by staff for no more
than three weeks after the request date. The purpose of the conceptual proposal review is to determine if
the proposal is eligible to be considered as an application for a housing design demonstration project and
to assist the applicant by identifying (i) requirements for submittal, including types of supplemental
materials for application; (ii) compliance with applicable city plans, goals, policies, codes, or guidelines
and possible revisions to the project that will enhance the proposal with respect to these requirements; (iii)
areas of BIMC Titles 17, Subdivisions and Boundary Line Adjustments, and 18, Zoning, where the
applicant seeks flexibility; and (iv) required plans, studies, reports, and/or other materials specific to the
proposal that will provide necessary information for staff and the design review board, and to review the
project under the criteria outlined in subsection S.4 of this section.
b. Preapplication Conference. The applicant shall apply for a preapplication conference pursuant to
subsection I of this section. Housing design demonstration projects shall be reviewed by both staff and the
design review board, pursuant to subsection F of this section. The applicant shall submit an HDDP
proposal consistent with the requirements in the administrative manual. The applicant shall consider input
received during the public meetings and conceptual review with city staff in crafting the proposal. The
proposal will be evaluated pursuant to subsection S.4 of this section by city staff with the design review
board serving in an advisory role, in addition to their review of applicable design guidelines. The director
shall prepare written findings of fact, and applicants will receive preliminary notification from the director
whether the proposal will qualify as a housing design demonstration project, or feedback about how to
improve the proposal to qualify. If the applicant changes the proposal in any significant manner other than
a response to feedback from the public meeting, conceptual review, or the preapplication review, an
additional preapplication conference may be required.
c. Application Submittal. An applicant may submit a land use permit application (subdivision, site plan
and design review, or conditional use permit) for a housing design demonstration project after completion
of a required conceptual and preapplication review and notification by the city that the proposal qualifies
as a housing design demonstration project. Upon receipt of an application, the director shall provide notice
to the applicant and public in accordance with subsection M of this section and commence the application
review process. Housing design demonstration projects that require more than one land use permit must
utilize the consolidated project review process outlined in BIMC 2.16.170. All housing design
demonstration project applications, including subdivisions, shall be reviewed by the design review board
and the planning commission at public meetings. The design review board and the planning commission
shall make recommendations on all housing design demonstration projects.
d. Permit Decision. The decision to approve or deny a housing design demonstration project shall be made
as part of underlying land use permit approval. The decision shall be based upon the decision criteria of
the underlying planning permit, and the decision criteria outlined in subsection S.5 of this section.
Housing design demonstration project approval conditions shall be included in the final permit approval
and shall address any ongoing compliance requirements, including compliance with approved design
plans. The city may require that the applicant record covenants to ensure ongoing compliance or
maintenance for required project components.
e. Building Permit. The applicant shall submit a building permit that is consistent with all conditions of the
land use permit approval. The applicant shall also submit documentation that the project has applied for
required certification by a green building rating system, such as Evergreen Sustainable Development,
LEED, or BuiltGreen. Proof of ongoing certification shall be required during construction and project
certification must be completed prior to final occupancy.
f. Living Building Challenge. For projects pursuing the Living Building Challenge standard of the
International Living Building Institute, the applicant must show proof of pursuing ongoing certification
during construction for all required elements. After construction, and prior to issuance of the certificate of
Page 18/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
occupancy, the applicant must show proof of initial project compliance as to the site, materials, indoor
quality and beauty/inspiration components of the Living Building Challenge and that the project is likely
to achieve the elements of energy and water following 12 months of occupancy as required under Living
Building Challenge certification. For those elements of energy and water that require occupancy of the
building for 12 months for Living Building Challenge certification, the applicant must submit a report to
the city following 12 months of occupancy, demonstrating its progress towards meeting these remaining
elements of the Living Building Challenge standard. If certification of those elements has not been
achieved, the applicant must provide quarterly reports of progress towards certification of these elements,
including additional steps and timeline that will be taken to achieve certification.
4. Evaluation Method. Each project will be evaluated for innovation and achievement of the goals of this
subsection S using a number of factors. The evaluation factors are divided into three categories. Examples of
sustainable development methods do not limit other mechanisms of meeting the evaluation factor. Projects that
qualify as housing design demonstration projects are eligible to use the flexible development standard
incentives outlined in subsections S.6 and 7 of this section, and are eligible for the residential incentives
outlined below and in subsection S.8 of this section. Table 2.16.020.S-1 shows how projects are evaluated to
qualify for the housing design demonstration project program.
a. Housing Diversity. Evaluation will review:
i. Unit Size. HDDP housing units cannot be larger than 1,600 square feet; and
ii. Affordable Housing. The project includes at least 50 percent of housing units that are affordable to
households at or below low-income, as described in Chapter 18.21 BIMC, Affordable Housing, and
BIMC 18.36.030. For rental projects: 50 percent of required affordable housing units must serve
households with an income less than or equal to 60 percent AMI. Designated affordable housing shall
remain affordable for 99 years from the time of final inspection on the affordable unit. The applicant
shall record covenants that demonstrate how the unit will remain affordable and be managed for 99
Page 19/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
years. Any ADUs constructed on lots where the primary unit is designated as required affordable
housing must also be maintained as designated affordable housing.
b. Innovative Site Development. All HDDP projects will follow the Washington State Department of
Ecology’s 2019 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. The project must integrate at
least two of the 14 sustainable site methods listed across the four sustainable site categories below (water
quality and conservation, landscaping, open space, and transportation). For projects which designate at
least 75 percent of units as affordable housing, compliance with the innovative site development
requirements is optional, not required.
i. Water Quality and Conservation. Projects use methods to decrease water usage and improve
stormwater runoff quality through an integrated approach to stormwater management such as:
(A) Greywater. At least 30 percent of dwelling units integrate greywater use.
(B) Cisterns. At least 30 percent of total project roof area stormwater collection is directed to
cisterns.
(C) Green Roofs. At least 30 percent of total project roof area qualifies as a “green” or vegetated
roof.
(D) Covered Parking. At least 80 percent of total project parking spaces are covered (e.g., parking
garage, carport).
ii. Landscaping. The project uses low maintenance landscaping and limits the amount of lawn in
private yards in favor of common open space. Projects are encouraged to use cisterns to collect
rainwater for irrigation or garden use.
(A) Native or Drought Tolerant Plants. Project landscaping integrates at least 60 percent native or
drought tolerant plants.
(B) Private Yards. All private yard areas within the project designed to have less than or equal to
20 percent turf/grass.
(C) Heritage Trees. The project preserves one or more tree that has been approved as a “heritage
tree” under the city’s program.
iii. Common Open Space. The project provides connected common open space area set aside as active
open space and designed and integrated into the project. The open space could include active elements
such as a neighborhood garden/pea patch and composting facilities, or a playground. Critical areas and
their buffers and required roadside buffers do not contribute to “common open space” under the
housing design demonstration project program.
(A) Open Space. The project integrates at least 25 percent of the lot area as common open space.
(B) Neighborhood Garden. The project incorporates a neighborhood garden or pea patch.
iv. Transportation. The project uses a design that provides enhanced sensitivity to pedestrian and
bicycle travel and internally preserves existing informal, internal connection to external trail(s), or
creates new connections where appropriate, to implement the Island-Wide Transportation Plan
(IWTP). The project design strives to reduces reliance on automobiles and trip counts, and promotes
alternative transportation and public transit.
(A) Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging. The project integrates EV charging facilities for at least 10
percent of vehicle parking capacity, locating rechargeable electric vehicle (EV) parking in a
conspicuous and preferred location close to a main building entrance.
Page 20/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
(B) Car Sharing. The project integrates a parking space for a vehicle sharing program, such as
Zipcar™.
(C) Public Nonmotorized Facilities. The project provides public walkways, sidewalks, separated
paths, or bike lanes not otherwise required by the IWTP. Facility location and design is subject to
approval by the department of public works.
(D) Covered Bike Parking. The project provides covered, consolidated bike parking.
(E) Bus Shelter. The project provides a covered bus shelter(s) for Kitsap Transit and school bus
riders. Shelter location and design must be consistent with any Kitsap Transit, city, or school
district requirements.
c. Innovative Building Design. The project shall be constructed under a green building certification
program that requires third-party verification such as the Evergreen Sustainable Development, Living
Building Challenge standard of the International Living Building Institute, Passive House Institute
US/International, LEED or the BuiltGreen Program of the Master Builders of King and Snohomish
Counties.
5. Approval Criteria. In addition to decision criteria required by the underlying planning permit or approval, an
application for a housing design demonstration project may be approved if the following criteria are met:
a. The applicant clearly demonstrates that the evaluation factors listed in subsection S.4 of this section will
be met, as evaluated by the planning and public works departments;
b. The applicant has demonstrated how relief from specific development standards, including setback
reductions, lot coverage and/or design guidelines, is needed to achieve the desired innovative design and
the goals of this chapter;
c. The project does not adversely impact existing public service levels for surrounding properties;
d. The project complies with all other portions of the BIMC, except as modified through this housing
design demonstration project process;
e. If a project will be phased, each phase of a proposed project must contain adequate infrastructure, open
space, recreational facilities, landscaping and all other conditions of the project to stand alone if no other
subsequent phases are developed; and
f. The applicant is meeting required housing diversity standards. Management of long-term affordability
for designated affordable housing will be monitored through the use of recorded covenants and/or other
agreements.
6. Development Standard Incentives for Development Projects in the Mixed-Use Town Center. The applicant
may request that development standards from BIMC Titles 17 and 18 be modified as part of a housing design
demonstration project. The city will review the request to modify development standards through the project
review process outlined in subsection S.3 of this section. Requirements of BIMC Title 16 may not be modified.
The following development standards may be modified:
a. Minimum Lot Dimensions and Size. Reductions in lot size or dimensions are subject to approval by
Kitsap County health district.
b. Maximum Lot Coverage. Maximum lot coverage can be increased above zoning district requirements
with no maximum.
c. Natural Area. For MUTC projects developed under BIMC Title 17, the prescriptive natural area
requirements in Table 17.12.070-1 do not apply. Instead, the project shall integrate at least 50 square feet
of natural area per unit.
Page 21/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
d. Residential Parking. The parking requirements outlined in BIMC 18.15.020 may be modified to require
one parking space for homes under 800 square feet and one and one-half parking spaces for homes
between 800 and 1,200 square feet. This reduction may not be combined with any other reductions to
result in less than one space per unit, and additional guest parking may be required pursuant to Table
18.15.020-1. A limited number of parking spaces may be designed to accommodate alternative fuel or
subcompact vehicles such as Smart™ cars, with parking stall dimensional standards reduced from the
standards outlined in BIMC 18.15.020.J. The applicants are encouraged to work with neighboring
property owners to ensure street parking is not overburdened. If the project is requesting a reduction in
required parking through the housing design demonstration project program, then the development shall
integrate at least one guest parking space for every five dwelling units.
i. For projects which designate 100 percent affordable housing and within one mile of the ferry
terminal, for units less than 900 square feet in size, the parking requirement is reduced to one-half
space per unit.
e. Setbacks. Unless required for public safety purposes, such as sight distance, setbacks may be reduced as
described below. This section does not supersede lesser setback requirements in the MUTC/HS Road district
zones, as outlined in Tables 17.12.070-1 and 18.12.020-3, as applicable.
i. Zoning Setback Reductions.
(A) Front setback within project: 10 feet.
(B) Rear setback within project: minimum of five feet.
(C) Side setback within project: minimum of five feet.
ii. Subdivision Setback Reductions.
(A) All interior subdivision setbacks: zero feet.
(B) Building to exterior subdivision boundary: five feet.
(C) Building to right-of-way or on-site private access: 10 feet.
f. Building Height. Buildings within the Mixed-Use Town Center or High School Road districts may
achieve a maximum building height not to exceed the optional height outlined in Table 18.12.020-3.
7. Development Standard Incentives for Development Projects in Residential Zones. The applicant may request
that development standards from BIMC Titles 17 and 18 be modified as part of a housing design demonstration
project. The city will review the request to modify development standards through the project review process
outlined in subsection S.3 of this section. Requirements of BIMC Title 16 may not be modified. The following
development standards may be modified:
a. Minimum Lot Dimensions and Size. Reductions in lot size or dimensions are subject to approval by
Kitsap County health district.
b. Maximum Lot Coverage. Maximum lot coverage can be increased above zoning district requirements
with no maximum.
c. Natural Area. For residentially zoned projects developed under BIMC Title 17, the prescriptive natural
area requirements in Table 17.12.070-1 do not apply. Instead, the project shall integrate at least 400 square
feet of natural area per unit.
Page 22/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
d. Residential Parking. The parking requirements outlined in BIMC 18.15.020 may be modified to require
one parking space for homes under 800 square feet and one and one-half parking spaces for homes
between 800 and 1,200 square feet. This reduction may not be combined with any other reductions to
result in less than one space per unit, and additional guest parking may be required pursuant to Table
18.15.020-1. A limited number of parking spaces may be designed to accommodate alternative fuel or
subcompact vehicles such as Smart™ cars, with parking stall dimensional standards reduced from the
standards outlined in BIMC 18.15.020.J. The applicants are encouraged to work with neighboring
property owners to ensure street parking is not overburdened. If the project is requesting a reduction in
required parking through the housing design demonstration project, then the development shall integrate at
least one guest parking space for every five dwelling units.
i. For projects which designate 100 percent affordable housing and within one mile of the ferry
terminal, for units less than 900 square feet in size, the parking requirement is reduced to one-half
space per unit.
e. Setbacks. Unless required for public safety purposes, such as sight distance, zoning and subdivision
setbacks may be reduced as described below. This section does not supersede lesser setback requirements
as outlined in Tables 17.12.070-1 and 18.12.020-2, as applicable. Additional vegetative landscaping
screen may be required by the director when reducing setbacks.
i. Zoning Setback Reductions.
(A) Front setback to on-site access: 10 feet.
ii. Subdivision Setback Reductions.
(A) All interior subdivision setbacks: zero feet.
(B) Building to on-site access: 10 feet.
8. Density Bonus Incentives. An increase in residential base density may be permitted as outlined in Table
2.16.020.S-1.
9. Housing Project Visit. In order to learn from the innovative design practices, if used, all projects completed
under this subsection S shall allow city staff to conduct occasional site tours. City staff will make a request of
the property owner prior to conducting a tour and will not access the properties for tours more than once every
three months. The site tours will be limited to the exterior and common grounds of the property and conducted
during regular business hours. Visits will be coordinated through the staff and property owner, and the owner
will receive written notice no less than two weeks in advance of each visit. Any additional access to private
property or at alternative times shall be at the permission and cooperation of the individual homeowner only.
10. Demonstration Period. This subsection S and related provisions of BIMC Titles 2, 17, and 18 shall expire
when an updated affordable housing program is adopted to replace code provisions of BIMC 18.12.030.D and
.E and Chapter 18.21 BIMC.
T. Computing Time. Unless otherwise specified, all time frames in this BIMC Section 2.16 are indicated as calendar
dates pursuant to RCW 36.70B.080(1)(g), as now exists and subsequently amended.
Page 23/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
Exhibit B
BIMC 2.16.040
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish a comprehensive site plan and design review process that
ensures compliance with the adopted plans, policies, and ordinances of the city. The overall goal of this chapter is to
minimize land alteration, provide greater site development flexibility and consequently provide more creative and
imaginative design than generally is possible under conventional zoning regulations. It is further intended to provide
for the review of development proposals with respect to overall site design and to provide a means for guiding
development in a logical, safe, attractive, and expedient manner, while also allowing property to be developed in
phases. An additional purpose is to promote those specific purposes for each zoning district stated in Chapter 18.06
BIMC.
B. Applicability.
1. Site plan and design review shall be required prior to the issuance of construction permits in any of the
following circumstances:
a. The new construction of a nonresidential building or other structure; or
b. The expansion, remodel, or alteration of any building or other structure by more than five percent of its
existing floor area, or, in the case of structures with no floor area, the expansion, remodel, or alteration by
more than five (5) percent of overall size in cases where floor area is not applicable; or expansion that
creates a new dwelling unit; or
c. A change of use that: (i) proposes to alter the exterior of the structure, or (ii) that results in increased
parking demands, where traffic, parking, noise or other impacts are greater than the impacts for the
previously existing use, as determined by the director; or
d. The construction of new wireless communication support structures (but not the location of wireless
facilities on existing buildings).
2. Exemptions. The following types of activities shall not require site plan and design review pursuant to this
section. Properties within jurisdiction of the shoreline master program, as defined by Chapter 16.12 BIMC, or
containing critical areas or critical area buffers, as defined by Chapter 16.20 BIMC, may require review
pursuant to those chapters.
a. Permits authorizing residential construction for detached single-family residential use and accessory
dwelling units.
b. Any activity that does not require a building permit, or any activity that is not considered a change in
use, as determined by the director.
c. Any activity on the exterior of a building that does not exceed 25 percent change in any existing facade
or roof form.
d. Interior work that does not alter the exterior of the structure and does not affect parking standards;
provided that the application does not result in the following: as determined by the director.
i. additional sleeping quarters or bedrooms;
ii. nonconformity with federal emergency management agency substantial improvement
thresholds; or
iii. increase the total square footage or valuation of the structure thereby requiring upgraded fire
access or fire suppression systems.
Page 24/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
e. Normal building maintenance and repair.
f. Maintenance or expansion of existing parks where the proposed activities are exempt from SEPA review
in accordance with WAC 197-11-800.
g. Construction of public communications towers.
3. The provisions of this section supplement those of BIMC 2.16.020 and 2.16.030 when the application is for
site plan or design review. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of BIMC 2.16.020 or 2.16.030 and
this section, the provisions of this section shall govern.
C. Major and Minor. This section provides two methods of site plan and design review: major and minor.
Application materials for both major and minor site plan and design review can be found in the administrative
manual.
1. Minor. Minor site plan and design review is required for minor projects that can clearly meet the decision
criteria in subsection F of this section, as determined by the director. Examples of minor administrative
projects include: (a) a fourplex multifamily development; (b) minor commercial remodel or the addition of a
small room; and (c) a minor change in use, such as from a church to a preschool.
2. Major. Major site plan and design review requires design review board and planning commission review
and recommendation, and is required for projects that: (a) are determined by the director to be more
complicated than those in subsection C.1 of this section, due to site constraints or the complexity of the
project; or (b) receive written public comment(s) during the public comment period concerning the effect on
the land use application of the comprehensive plan, shoreline master program, or matters not addressed by
specific provisions of this code; or (c) are located on property zoned business/industrial after November 22,
1999.
D. Review Procedures – Proposal Stage. Review of site plan and design review proposals shall include all of the
following in the order listed:
1. Preapplication Conference. The applicant shall participate in a preapplication conference in accordance
with the provisions and requirements in BIMC 2.16.020.I.
2. Conceptual Review. The conceptual review will be held at a meeting of the design review board. The
applicant will present a short project description, zoning summary, and a thorough narrative of design context
in accordance with the Design for Bainbridge manual and appendices. This meeting is a means of providing
feedback on projects in their earliest stages before applicants are committed to a particular design. The
conceptual review is an opportunity to ensure that the applicant understands the design review process, and
the design standards and guidelines. This early touch allows the design review board and applicant to
consider optional concepts for a project that may be better suited to the Island community, to dialogue in an
informal manner with the applicant, and review the design standards and guidelines applicable to the project.
Project design submittal requirements are described in the Design for Bainbridge appendices.
3. Public Participation Meeting. As part of the project proposal phase, applicants are required to participate in
a community meeting through the city’s public participation program at a planning commission meeting and
as outlined in Resolution No. 2021-07. The public participation meeting is a meeting of public engagement,
and the applicant’s opportunity to respond to questions, comments, and assessments of the proposed project.
A second public participation meeting may be required if significant project changes occur after completion
of the design guidance review.
4. Design Guidance Review. The design guidance review will be held at a meeting of the design review
board. The design guidance review meeting is intended to provide input and guidance to an applicant that the
proposed project is responding adequately to the Design for Bainbridge standards and guidelines, including
recommendations for how the project could be revised to achieve greater consistency. The applicant shall also
Page 25/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
make known the potential need and rationale for any departure from the design standards and guidelines. The
design submittal requirements are described in the Design for Bainbridge appendices. Additional design
guidance review may be required if significant project changes occur after the initial design guidance review.
5. Final Design Review and Recommendation. The design review board reviews and makes a final
determination of project consistency with Design for Bainbridge standards and guidelines. The design review
board will forward written findings, their determination of the project’s consistency with the standards and
guidelines, the design guideline checklist, and their recommendation, including any conditions, to the staff
planner. Any condition attached to a recommendation must be intended to achieve consistency with one or
more specific standards or guidelines. The design review board’s written findings will be included in the staff
report transmitted to the director or planning commission. The design review board shall recommend
approval, approval with conditions or departures, or denial. A design review board recommendation is not a
final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. The planning commission may
determine that additional design review is required if significant project changes occur following the final
design review and recommendation.
E. Review Procedures – Application Stage. Review of site plan and design review applications shall include all of
the following:
1. Application. An applicant may submit an application for site plan and design review at any time after
completion of the required steps in subsection D of this section or approval of a waiver in accordance with
BIMC 2.16.020.I.3 or I.4 or subsection D.1 of this section. The applicant shall submit a complete application
with all required submittal requirements listed in the administrative manual.
2. Review by Kitsap Public Health District.
a. Upon receipt of the application and determination of completeness, the director shall transmit a copy
of the application to the health district.
b. The health district shall provide written recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or
disapproval of the preliminary long subdivision application pursuant to the decision criteria in
subsection F of this section.
3. Review by City Engineer.
a. Upon receipt of the application and determination of completeness, the director shall transmit a copy
of the application to the city engineer.
b. The city engineer shall provide written recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or
disapproval of the preliminary long subdivision application pursuant to the decision criteria in
subsection F of this section.
4. Review and Recommendation by Planning Commission.
a. In the case of a major site plan and design review application, the planning commission shall review
the application prior to the review and final decision by the director.
b. The purpose of the planning commission review and recommendation meeting is to review a
proposed project for consistency with applicable design guidelines, BIMC Title 17, and the
comprehensive plan.
c. The planning commission shall consider the application at a public meeting where public comments
will be taken. The planning commission shall recommend approval, approval with conditions or denial
of an application. In making a recommendation, the planning commission shall consider the applicable
decision criteria, all other applicable law, and the recommendation of the design review board. If the
Page 26/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
applicable criteria are not met, the planning commission shall recommend the proposal be modified or
denied.
d. The design review board’s recommendation shall hold substantial weight in the consideration of the
application by the planning commission. Any deviation from the recommendation shall be documented
in their written findings of facts and conclusions.
e. The planning commission will forward its written findings of facts and conclusions, their
determination of the project’s consistency with the comprehensive plan, and their recommendation,
including any conditions attached by the planning commission and design review board, to the staff
planner. The planning commission’s written findings will be included in the staff report transmitted to
the director. The planning commission’s recommendation shall be given substantial weight by the
director in making a decision.
f. A planning commission recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the
recommendation.
5. Review and Approval by Director.
a. The director shall review the application materials, information provided by the health district and
city engineer, staff report, any public comments received, the recommendations of the design review
board and, in the case of major site plan and design review applications, the recommendations of the
planning commission, and shall make a final decision based on:
i. In the case of a minor site plan and design review application, the final decision on an
application is made by the director based on (A) decision criteria in subsection F of this section,
(B) the DRB recommendation, and (C) consideration of any public comments received.
ii. In the case of a major site plan and design review application, the director will make the final
decision based on (A) the decision criteria in subsection F of this section, (B) the
recommendation of the planning commission, (C) the recommendation of the design review
board, and (D) consideration of any public comments received. The design review board’s and
planning commission’s recommendations shall hold substantial weight in the consideration of the
application by the director. Any deviation from those recommendations shall be documented in
the director’s report.
b. The director shall make compliance with the recommendations of the design review board and/or
planning commission a condition of approval, unless the director concludes that the recommendations:
i. Reflect inconsistent application of design guidelines or any applicable provisions of this code;
ii. Exceed the authority of the design review board or planning commission;
iii. Conflict with SEPA conditions or other regulatory requirements applicable to the project; or
iv. Conflict with requirements of local, state, or federal law.
c. The director shall adopt a planning commission recommendation of denial of an application unless
the director concludes that the recommendation:
i. Reflects inconsistent application of design guidelines, the comprehensive plan, or any
applicable provisions of this code;
ii. Exceeds the authority of the design review board or planning commission;
iii. Conflicts with SEPA conditions or other regulatory requirements applicable to the project; or
Page 27/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
iv. Conflicts with requirements of local, state, or federal law.
6. Relationship to Other Land Development Applications – Consolidated Project Review.
a. If requested by the applicant, a site plan and design review application that is part of a proposal
requiring multiple land use permits may be combined in a consolidated project review. Related
applications requiring a public hearing shall be considered at one public hearing in accordance with
BIMC 2.16.170.
b. If a site plan and design review application is part of a consolidated project, the director will review
the site plan and design review application as prescribed under subsection E.6.a or E.6.b of this section,
as appropriate, and forward the findings and decision to the appropriate hearing body for any required
public hearing.
F. Decision Criteria. The director and planning commission shall base their respective recommendations or
decisions on site plan and design review applications on the following criteria:
1. The site plan and design is consistent with all applicable provisions of the BIMC, design guidelines, the
comprehensive plan, and applicable subarea and master plans; and
2. The locations of the buildings and structures, open spaces, and landscaping result in a context-sensitive
design; and
3. The Kitsap public health district has determined that the site plan and design meets the following decision
criteria:
a. The proposal conforms to current standards regarding domestic water supply and sewage disposal; or
if the proposal is not to be served by public sewers, then the lot has sufficient area and soil, topographic
and drainage characteristics to permit an on-site sewage disposal system; and
b. If the health district recommends approval of the application with respect to those items in subsection
F.3.a of this section, the health district shall so advise the director; and
c. If the health district recommends disapproval of the application, it shall provide a written explanation
to the director; and
4. The streets and nonmotorized facilities, as proposed, are adequate to accommodate anticipated traffic; and
5. The city engineer has determined that the site plan and design meets the following decision criteria:
a. The site plan and design conforms to regulations concerning drainage in
Chapters 15.20 and 15.21 BIMC; and
b. The site plan and design will not cause an undue burden on the drainage basin or water quality and
will not unreasonably interfere with the use of properties downstream; and
c. The streets, nonmotorized facilities, locations of the buildings, structures, and vehicular circulation
systems as proposed align with and are otherwise coordinated with streets and nonmotorized facilities
serving adjacent properties and are adequate, safe, efficient and consistent with the island-wide
transportation plan; and
d. If a traffic study shows that the proposed development will have an adverse impact on traffic,
including nonmotorized traffic, the impact shall be mitigated as required by the city engineer; and
Page 28/28
{EFM4895-2890-9011;8/13023.130005/}
e. If the site will rely on public water or sewer services, there is capacity in the water or sewer system
(as applicable) to serve the site, and the required service(s) can be made available at the site; and
f. The site plan and design conforms to the “City of Bainbridge Island Engineering Design and
Construction Standards and Specifications,” unless the city engineer has approved a deviation from the
standards; and
6. No harmful or unhealthful conditions are likely to result from the proposed site plan; and
7. If the subject property contains a critical area or buffer, as defined in Chapter 16.20 BIMC, the site plan
and design review permit conforms to all requirements of that chapter; and
8. If the subject property is within the shoreline jurisdiction, as defined in Chapter 16.12 BIMC, the site plan
and design review permit conforms to all requirements of that chapter; and
9. If the applicant is providing privately owned open space and is requesting credit against dedications for
park and recreation facilities required by BIMC 17.20.020.C, the requirements of BIMC 17.20.020.D have
been met; and
10. The Bainbridge Island fire department has reviewed the application and determined that the site plan has
been properly designed to ensure fire protection; and
11. The site plan and design has been prepared consistent with the purpose and review procedures of this
chapter.
G. Action of Director. The director may approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application for site plan
and design review. Conditions may be imposed to enable the proposal to meet the standards of the decision criteria.
H. Adjustments to Approved Site Plan.
1. Minor adjustments to an approved site plan and design review may be made after review and approval by
the director. Minor adjustments are those that include minor changes in dimensions or siting of structures or
the location of public amenities, but do not include changes to the intensity or character of the use. Minor
adjustments are processed through a written request from the applicant and a written response from
department staff. The city response is placed in the project file and is effective to modify the approval as
described in the response.
2. Adjustments other than minor adjustments to an approved site plan and design review require a new or
amended application as determined by the director. Major adjustments are those that change the basic design,
intensity, density, or character of the use.