Ordinance No. 2025-07 Design Review Amendments (Approved 052725)Page 1/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-07
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Bainbridge Island, Washington, relating to the
regulation of design review procedures, amending Sections 2.14.040, 2.16.010, 2.16.020,
2.16.040, 2.16.070, 2.16.080, 2.16.110, 2.16.125, and 17.12.040 of the Bainbridge Island
Municipal Code (BIMC); repealing Section 17.12.020 Municipal Code (BIMC); Repealing
Ord.2021-12; adopting a new “Design by Bainbridge” design review manual; and providing for
severability.
WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature passed House Bill 1293 (HB 1293) codified
as RCW 36.70A. in 2023 requiring municipalities to streamline their design review processes; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section One of HB 1293 municipalities are required to apply only
clear and objective development regulations governing the exterior design of new development;
and
WHEREAS, Section One of HB 1293 also requires municipalities to conduct their design
review process concurrently, or otherwise logically integrated, with the consolidated review and
decision process for project permits and that no design review process may include more than one
public meeting; and
WHEREAS, Section One of HB 1293 requires municipalities to comply with the new
design review regulations within six months after their next periodic comprehensive plan update
under RCW 36.70A.130; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bainbridge Island (“City”) regulates design review both in Chapter
2 and in Chapter 17 of the BIMC; and
WHEREAS, the City maintains “Design for Bainbridge” which operates as the official
design review manual for the City and includes the both the standards and guidelines used during
the design review process; and
WHEREAS, the current version of the “Design for Bainbridge” was adopted by Ord.
2021-12; and
WHEREAS, the City is in the process of finalizing its comprehensive plan periodic update
and is required to adopt the updated plan pursuant to RCW 36.70A.130; and
WHEREAS, the City is required to comply with the requirements of HB 1293 by June
2025; and
Page 2/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
WHEREAS, the Bainbridge Island City Council finds that it is necessary to amend its
design review codes, and repeal and replace the “Design for Bainbridge” design review manual in
order to comply with the state-mandated design review regulations required by HB 1293.
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 and legislative
findings in support of this ordinance.
Section 2. Amend. Section 2.14.040 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 3. Amend. Section 2.16.010 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit B, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 4. Amend. Section 2.16.020 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit C, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 5. Amend. Section 2.16.040 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
amended its as shown on Exhibit D, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
Section 6. Amend. Section 2.16.070 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit E, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 7. Amend. Section 2.16.080 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit F, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 8. Amend. Section 2.16.110 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit G, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 9. Repeal. Section 17.12.020 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
repealed in its entirety.
Section 10. Amend. Section 2.16.125 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby
amended as shown on Exhibit H, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
Page 3/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Section 11. Amend. Section 17.12.040 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code
is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit I, which is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference.
Section 12. Repeal. Ord. 2021-12 adopting the current “Design by Bainbridge”
manual is hereby repealed in its entirety.
Section 13. Adopt. The City hereby adopts the “Design for Bainbridge” design
review manual as shown in Exhibit J, which is attached hereto and incorporated by
reference.
Section 14. 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 15. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code
reviser is 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 16 . This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and
after its passage and publication as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council this 27th day of May 2025.
APPROVED by the Mayor this 27th day of May 2025.
Ashley Mathews, Mayor
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE:
___________________________________
Christine Brown, MMC, City Clerk
Page 4/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: May 23, 2025
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: May 27, 2025
PUBLISHED: May 30, 2025
EFFECTIVE DATE: June 3, 2025
ORDINANCE NUMBER: 2025-07
Page 5/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Exhibit A
BIMC 2.14.040
2.14.040 Design review board.
A. Membership – Appointment – Term.
1. There is created a design review board (board) for the city. The design review board
shall consist of seven members, and the appointments and confirmations of those members
shall be governed by Chapter 2.01 BIMC. Board membership shall include at least one
representative with expertise in the following disciplines and/or groups: landscape
architecture; urban design; public art committee or local artist; developers; at-large
community member; and at least two architects. The members of the design review board
shall not be officers or employees of the city or appointed to another city committee, board
or commission, except for specialized committees or task forces of limited duration.
2. The members of the board shall serve without compensation. The terms for appointed
members shall be three years, commencing on July 1st and ending on June 30th three years
later. Members shall be appointed to a position number, and the terms are to be staggered,
with no more than three positions expiring in any given year. A member may indicate
interest in reappointment for additional terms, although reappointment is not guaranteed,
and shall hold office until his or her successor has been appointed and has qualified. No
member shall serve more than three consecutive terms unless the city council determines
that special expertise is required, or there are no other qualified applicants.
B. Vacancies – Removal. In the event of a vacancy, the mayor, subject to the confirmation of the
city council, shall make an appointment to fill the unexpired portion of the term of the vacated
position in accordance with the city’s appointment cycle. The removal and resignation of
members shall be governed by Chapter 2.01 BIMC.
C. Organization.
1. The board shall select one member to serve as chair for a one-year term at the first
regular meeting of each year. Demotion of the chair shall be governed by
Chapter 2.01 BIMC.
Page 6/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
2. The board shall adopt such rules and regulations as are necessary to accomplish its
duties and responsibilities. These rules and regulations shall be published on the city’s web
site.
3. The city shall provide necessary supplies and support staff to the board, consistent with
available resources.
4. The city shall provide city email accounts to board members and related training on the
use of email accounts, including personal computer privacy expectations while serving on
the board.
D. Duties and Responsibilities. The board shall have the following duties and responsibilities:
1. Review and make recommendations on all preliminary large lot subdivisions, preliminary long
subdivisions, major site plan and design reviews, and major conditional use permits, except for
applications related to utility facilities and to non-city outdoor recreation facilities. , and major
shoreline conditional use permits. Additionally, Aapplications related to single-family residences
such as family day care homes, minor/major home occupations, and single-family residential
height variations are exempt from design review board consideration. In addition, applications
related to utility facilities and to non-city outdoor recreation facilities are exempt from design
review board consideration.
2. Review and make recommendations on preliminary short subdivisions if requested by the
director.
32. Review and make recommendations to the planning commission and the city council on
changes, amendments, and/or additions to the design guidelinesstandards.
43. Serve in an advisory and review capacity to housing design demonstration project
applications pursuant to BIMC 2.16.020.S, including those design demonstration project
applications involving land subdivision.
54. Review and serve in an advisory capacity to the city regarding major public projects.
65. Such other duties and responsibilities as may be provided by resolution or ordinance of the
city council.
76. Report annually to the city council prior to the start of the budget process.
E. Open Meetings. All board meetings shall be open to the public and held in accordance with
the Open Public Meetings Act (Chapter 42.30 RCW). The board, in its discretion, may allow
interested citizens to speak and submit documents.
Page 7/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
F. Public Records. For meetings consisting of a majority of the then serving members, the board
shall provide public notice of the meeting and shall keep a record of its meeting minutes.
Minutes of each meeting, including a record of attendance, shall be prepared by the secretary and
approved and signed at a subsequent meeting. The minutes do not need to reflect the actual
discussion, but only the formal actions taken by the design review board. The approved meeting
minutes shall be posted on the city’s web site.
G. Quorum. A majority of the appointed members then serving on the board shall constitute a
quorum.
H. Conflict of Interest. Design review board members shall sign a conflict of interest statement
in accordance with the city’s ethics program upon appointment and any reappointment. If a
design review board member is an applicant for an application under review by the board, has a
financial interest in a project, or is a paid or unpaid advocate, agent or representative for such
applicant, the board member shall not participate in review of and recommendation on the
application, and he or she will be asked to leave the meeting facility prior to commencement of
discussion of that agenda item.
Page 8/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Exhibit B
BIMC 2.16.010
2.16.010 Land use procedures summary table.
Table 2.16.010-1: Summary Table of Land Use Procedures
R = Review and Recommendation, (R) = Optional Review, D = Decision, A = Appeal, P =
Public Hearing, (P) = Optional Public Hearing
DRB Planning
Comm.
Director Hearing
Examiner
City
Council
Courts
Administrative Approvals
Tree Removal/Vegetation Maintenance
Permit
D A
Conversion Option Harvest Plan Permit D A
Minor Conditional Use (R) (R) D A
Minor Variance (R) D A
Agricultural Conditional Use D A
Large Lot Subdivisions (Prelim) R R D A
A (Final) D
Minor Shoreline Variance [1] (R) D A A [2]
Minor Shoreline Conditional Use [1] (R) D A A [2]
Public Works Administrative Decisions D A
SEPA Determinations D A
Shoreline Substantial Development
Exemption [1]
D A
Shoreline Substantial Development [1] (R) D A A [2]
Page 9/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Table 2.16.010-1: Summary Table of Land Use Procedures
R = Review and Recommendation, (R) = Optional Review, D = Decision, A = Appeal, P =
Public Hearing, (P) = Optional Public Hearing
DRB Planning
Comm.
Director Hearing
Examiner
City
Council
Courts
Short Subdivisions (Prelim) (R) (R)3 D A
A (Final) D A
Sign Permits D A
Minor Site Plan and Design Review
outside the Winslow Master Plan Study
Area
(R) (R) D A
Minor Site Plan and Design Review
within the Winslow Master Plan Study
Area
(R) D A
Major Site Plan and Design Review
(Any SPR in the B/I district must be
processed through a major SPR)
R R D A
Critical Area Permit – Major and Minor D A
All other administrative decisions: This includes agricultural retail plans, boundary line
adjustments (see BIMC 2.16.090), building and other construction permits, building
administrative decisions, BIMC interpretations, extension of construction noise hours (see
BIMC 16.16.025), and any other administrative land use decision authorized by this code to be
made by the director.
D A
Quasi-Judicial Decisions by the Hearing Examiner
Conditional Use Permits R R R D/P A
Variances (R) R D/P A
Reasonable Use Exception (R) R D/P A
Page 10/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Table 2.16.010-1: Summary Table of Land Use Procedures
R = Review and Recommendation, (R) = Optional Review, D = Decision, A = Appeal, P =
Public Hearing, (P) = Optional Public Hearing
DRB Planning
Comm.
Director Hearing
Examiner
City
Council
Courts
(See BIMC 16.20.080)
Major Shoreline Variances [1] (R) R D/P A [2]
Major Shoreline Conditional Use
Permits [1]
R R R D/P A [2]
Long Subdivisions (Prelim) R R4 R D A
Quasi-Judicial Decisions by City Council
Long Subdivisions (Final) R D A
Site-Specific Rezones (R) R R/P D A
Consolidated Project Review
See BIMC 2.16.170
Legislative Approvals
Adoption or Amendment of
Development Regulations
R/P R D (P) A
Comprehensive Plan Amendments R/P R D (P) A
Legislative Area-Wide Rezones R/P R D (P) A
Special Area Plans R/P R D (P) A
[1] City decisions on shoreline variances, shoreline substantial development permits, and shoreline conditional use permits
must be reviewed by the Washington Department of Ecology pursuant to WAC 173-27-130 and RCW 90.58.140(10). The
Department of Ecology may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application.
Page 11/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
[2] The hearing examiner’s decision is forwarded to the Department of Ecology (DOE) for decision. The DOE decision is
then appealable to the Shoreline Hearings Board.
[3] The planning commission shall review all requests for departures for three or more lot short subdivisions from the applicable
subdivision standards pursuant to the criteria in BIMC 17.12.040.
[4] The planning commission shall review all requests for departures from applicable subdivision standards for long subdivisions
pursuant to the criteria in BIMC 17.12.040.
Page 12/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Exhibit C
BIMC 2.16.020
2.16.020 General provisions.
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.
Page 13/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
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.
Page 14/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 materialsa complete application, 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
Page 15/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
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;
Page 16/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
For those project subject to design review, tThe 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
Page 17/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 preapplication letter has
been completed.
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 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 in the administrative manual. 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.
Page 18/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
2. Determination of Complete Application.
a. A land use application shall be deemed 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 (see subsection L.4 of this section for timelines).
b. 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.
c. 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. Design Review Board Review of Complete Application.
a. Once an application has been deemed complete, the application materials shall be forwarded to
the Design Review Board and the project permit shall be scheduled on the next available Design
Review Board meeting agenda.
34. 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.
K. Fees.
Page 19/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
1. Fees and charges payable to the city prior to issuance of a land use permit or approval,
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.
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.
Page 20/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 120-day period:
a. Any period during which an application has been returned for correction or
modification with a request for missing or additional information necessary for
review, in accordance with subsection J.2 of this section;
b. Any period during which an environmental impact statement is being prepared
following a determination of significance pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW;
c. Any period during which an appeal of a project permit is being reviewed; and
d. Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city.
4. The time limits established by this section do not apply 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; or
b. Siting 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; or
d. An application for a street or right-of-way vacation.
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.
M. Notice Requirements.
1. Land Use Notice Summary Table.
Page 21/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Table 2.16.020-1 Land Use Notice Summary Table [1]
Mail, Fax,
E-mail, or
Other to
Applicant
Mail, Fax,
or E-mail
to Depts.,
Public,
and
Others
Publishing
in
Newspaper
Posting
Notice at
Official
Locations
Posting
Sign on the
Property
Notice of Complete Application ✔
Notice of Application and Public
Comment Period*
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
Notice of Public Hearing ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
Notice of Decision and Appeal
Period
✔ ✔∗∗
[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.
Page 22/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
b. 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.
c. 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 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;
Page 23/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 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
Page 24/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
Page 25/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 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.
Page 26/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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:
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
Page 27/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
Page 28/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 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.
Page 29/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
Page 30/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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
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.
Page 31/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 32/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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
Page 33/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 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
Page 34/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
Table 2.16.020.S-1: Housing Design Demonstration Project Scoring System
Density Incentives
Requirements to Receive Incentives
Green Building and Innovative Site
Development
Housing Diversity
2.5 x Base Density (for
properties in residential
zones)
OR
Max. Bonus Mixed-Use
FAR (for properties in the
MUTC and HS Road
zoning districts)
• LEED Silver, BuiltGreen 4, or
Evergreen Sustainable
Development
•
50% affordable housing
• Project meets innovative site
development methods requirements
of subsection S.4.b of this section
• Home size not larger than
1,600 sq. ft.
NOTE: For required affordable housing units:
o Required affordable housing units must serve low-income households with an income less than or
equal to 80% AMI. (See BIMC 18.21.020.A and 18.36.030.)
o Rental projects: 50% of required affordable house units must serve households with an income
less than or equal to 60% AMI.
Page 35/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Table 2.16.020.S-1: Housing Design Demonstration Project Scoring System
Density Incentives
Requirements to Receive Incentives
Green Building and Innovative Site
Development
Housing Diversity
o Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are not counted towards meeting affordable housing
requirements of the HDDP 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 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.
Page 36/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
(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
Page 37/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
(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;
Page 38/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
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
Page 39/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
Page 40/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
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
Page 41/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
Page 42/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Exhibit D
BIMC 2.16.040
BIMC 2.16.040 Site plans and design review
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 overall size in cases where floor area is
not applicable; or expansion that creates a new dwelling unit; or
c. A change of use, 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.
Page 43/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
b. Any activity that does not require a building permit or 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 or affect parking
standards as determined by the director.
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
Page 44/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
32. 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 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
Page 45/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 including design review submittals.
2. Review by Design Review Board. Upon receipt of the application and determination of
completeness, the Director shall schedule the applicant on the next available agenda for a Design
Review Board meeting. The applicant shall make a presentation to the Design Review Board per
the requirements of the Design Review Board manual. The Design Review Board reviews the
project materials and makes a recommendation on project consistency with Design for
Bainbridge standards. A Design Review Board recommendation is not a final decision and
therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. The Design Review Board’s
recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Department and may include recommended
changes to the design (to be evaluated by staff before issuing the permit) as well as
recommended conditions on the permit related to design. Any recommended changes to the
design or conditions on the permit must be intended to achieve consistency with one or more
specific standards in the Design for Bainbridge manual.
23. 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.
34. 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.
Page 46/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
45. 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 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.
Page 47/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
56. 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:
Page 48/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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
iv. Conflicts with requirements of local, state, or federal law.
67. 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
Page 49/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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
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
Page 50/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
Page 51/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Exhibit E
BIMC 2.16.070
BIMC 2.16.070 Short Subdivisions
A. Purpose. This section provides an administrative procedure for approving subdivision plats
including four lots or less.
B. Applicability. This procedure applies to all short subdivisions. Short subdivisions involve the
division or redivision of land into four lots or less when those plats meet the criteria set forth in
BIMC Title 17.
C. General Procedures.
1. Short subdivisions shall be approved through the general administrative review
procedures described in BIMC 2.16.030 except as described below. Application materials
for short subdivisions can be found in the administrative manual.
2. Short subdivisions shall not be used, either by a person alone or by persons acting
together, at one time or over a period of time, as a means to circumvent compliance with
the more stringent subdivision requirements that control the subdivision of land into five or
more lots. When an application for a short subdivision is filed within five years after the
approval of a short subdivision on a contiguous land parcel, a presumption of an attempt to
circumvent short subdivision requirements may be invoked by the director as a basis for
further investigation to assure compliance with the intent of this provision.
3. The provisions of this section shall supplement those of
BIMC 2.16.020 and 2.16.030 when the application is for a short subdivision. 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.
4. Vesting. A proposed short subdivision shall be considered under the subdivision
ordinance, zoning or other land use control ordinances, and the State Environmental Policy
Act in effect at the time a fully completed application for preliminary approval of the
subdivision has been submitted to the city. The requirements for a fully completed
application shall be defined by the administrative manual.
Page 52/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
5. Timeline for Review. The city has 90 calendar days from the filing of a complete
application in which to approve, disapprove, or return the application to the applicant for
modification. The timeline for review can be extended beyond 90 calendar days if the city
determines it has incomplete or insufficient application materials and/or if there are
significant changes to application materials. If no action can be taken to approve or
disapprove the application within the 90 calendar days, the director must notify the
applicant of the reasons for the delay and steps necessary to complete the application.
D. Review Procedures – Proposal Preapplication Stage. Review of short subdivision proposals
shall include all of the following in the order listed except that the division or redivision of land
into two lots shall not be required to comply with subsections D.2, D.3, and D.5 of this
section: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 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 and the administrative
manual and include documentation of the four-step design process, schematic design, and
completed subdivision design guidelines checklist. The four-step design process includes:
Page 53/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
a. Delineate Natural Space. The applicant shall prioritize natural resources on the site in terms of
their highest to least appropriateness for inclusion in the proposed natural area. On the basis of
those priorities and practical considerations given to the site’s configuration, its context in
relation to natural areas on adjoining and neighboring properties, and the applicant’s subdivision
objectives, natural space shall be delineated in a manner clearly indicating boundaries as well as
the types of resources. The amount of natural space required is provided in Chapter 17.12 BIMC.
b. Locate Homesites and Community Space. After delineating natural space, homesite areas and
community space shall be identified (a “sketch” diagram is acceptable), using the site analysis
and context maps produced for the conceptual proposal review meeting as a base map. The
amount of community space required is provided in Chapter 17.12 BIMC.
c. Define Access. After locating the natural space, homesites, and community space, the access
network shall be defined. The access network shall provide a safe, convenient, and efficient
system for vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation and minimize impacts on proposed
natural space.
d. Draw Lot Lines. Upon completion of the preceding three steps, draw lot lines to delineate the
boundaries of individual lots.
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 short subdivision applications shall
include all of the following:
1. Application. An applicant may submit an application for a short subdivision at any time after
completion of the required steps in subsection D of this section the preapplication conference 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.
Page 54/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 short 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 short subdivision application pursuant to the
decision criteria in subsection F of this section.
4. Review and Recommendation by Planning Commission.
a. Review and recommendation by the planning commission is optional unless the project
proposal includes a three or more lot short subdivision and a request for a departure from
applicable subdivision standards. Requests for departures pursuant to BIMC 17.12.040 for three
or more lot short subdivisions shall be reviewed by the planning commission. The director shall
determine whether review is necessary based on the major issues and specific aspects of the
project, the design review board recommendation, and any written public comments received
during the public comment period.
b. The purpose of the planning commission review and recommendation meeting is to review a
proposed project for consistency with applicable design guidelines, BIMC Titles 17 and 18, and
the comprehensive plan. If the proposed project includes a three or more lot short subdivision
and a request for departure from subdivisions standards, the planning commission shall review
the request pursuant to the criteria in BIMC 17.12.040.
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 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
Page 55/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
review board, to the staff planner. The planning commission’s written findings, conclusions and
recommendation will be included in the staff report transmitted to the director.
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 the recommendations of the planning commission.
b. The director will make the final decision based on (i) the decision criteria in subsection F of
this section, (ii) the recommendation of the planning commission, and (iii) the recommendation
of the design review board, and (iv) 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.
c. 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.
d. The director shall prepare written findings of facts and conclusions in support of the decision
made. If the director disapproves the application he or she shall provide a written explanation of
the reasons for the disapproval to the applicant.
A. Purpose. This section provides an administrative procedure for approving subdivision plats
including four lots or less.
B. Applicability. This procedure applies to all short subdivisions. Short subdivisions involve the
division or redivision of land into four lots or less when those plats meet the criteria set forth in
BIMC Title 17.
C. General Procedures.
Page 56/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
1. Short subdivisions shall be approved through the general administrative review
procedures described in BIMC 2.16.030 except as described below. Application materials
for short subdivisions can be found in the administrative manual.
2. Short subdivisions shall not be used, either by a person alone or by persons acting
together, at one time or over a period of time, as a means to circumvent compliance with
the more stringent subdivision requirements that control the subdivision of land into five or
more lots. When an application for a short subdivision is filed within five years after the
approval of a short subdivision on a contiguous land parcel, a presumption of an attempt to
circumvent short subdivision requirements may be invoked by the director as a basis for
further investigation to assure compliance with the intent of this provision.
3. The provisions of this section shall supplement those of
BIMC 2.16.020 and 2.16.030 when the application is for a short subdivision. 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.
4. Vesting. A proposed short subdivision shall be considered under the subdivision
ordinance, zoning or other land use control ordinances, and the State Environmental Policy
Act in effect at the time a fully completed application for preliminary approval of the
subdivision has been submitted to the city. The requirements for a fully completed
application shall be defined by the administrative manual.
5. Timeline for Review. The city has 90 calendar days from the filing of a complete
application in which to approve, disapprove, or return the application to the applicant for
modification. The timeline for review can be extended beyond 90 calendar days if the city
determines it has incomplete or insufficient application materials and/or if there are
significant changes to application materials. If no action can be taken to approve or
disapprove the application within the 90 calendar days, the director must notify the
applicant of the reasons for the delay and steps necessary to complete the application.
Page 57/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
2.16.080 Large Lot Subdivisions
Exhibit F
BIMC 2.16.080
A. Purpose. This section provides an administrative procedure for approving subdivisions in
which all of the created lots are generally larger than five acres.
B. Applicability. This procedure applies to all large lot subdivisions. Large lot subdivisions
include divisions or redivisions of land so that each created lot contains at least five acres of land
(or 1/128th of a section of land, whichever is less)
C. General Procedures.
1. The provisions of this section shall supplement the general administrative review provisions of
BIMC 2.16.020 and 2.16.030 when the application is for a large lot subdivision. 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.
2. Large lot subdivisions shall be reviewed and approved through the procedures described for
short subdivisions in BIMC 2.16.070.D through F, with the exception that design review board
and planning commission review and recommendation are required, not optional.
3. Vesting. A proposed large lot subdivision shall be considered under the subdivision ordinance,
zoning or other land use control ordinances, and the State Environmental Policy Act in effect at
the time a fully completed application for preliminary approval of the subdivision has been
submitted to the city. The requirements for a fully completed application shall be defined by the
administrative manual.
4. Timeline for Review. The city has 90 calendar days from the filing of a complete application
in which to approve, disapprove, or return the application to the applicant for modification. The
timeline for review can be extended beyond 90 calendar days if the city determines it has
incomplete or insufficient application materials and/or if there are significant changes to
application materials. If no action can be taken to approve or disapprove the application within
Page 58/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
the 90 calendar days, the director must notify the applicant of the reasons for the delay and steps
necessary to complete the application.
D. Repealed by Ord. 2018-20.
E. Repealed by Ord. 2018-20.
F. Civil Plan Review.
1. The applicant shall submit civil engineering plans and designs to the city for review by
city staff and acceptance by the city engineer before submitting an application for final
large lot subdivision approval.
2. No construction on or to the site may take place until civil engineering plans have been
received and approved by the city.
3. After the preliminary large lot subdivision and civil engineering plans have been
approved the subdivider is authorized to develop the subdivision’s facilities and
improvements in strict accordance with the standards established by this title, related
standards in Titles 17 and 18, and any conditions imposed.
G. Review of Final Large Lot Subdivision Application.
1. Timeline for Review. Final large lot subdivisions shall be approved, approved with
conditions, disapproved or returned to the applicant by the director within 30 working days
from the date of filing of a complete application, unless the applicant consents to an
extension of such time period.
Page 59/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
2. Submittal of Final Plat. The submittal requirements shall be the same as those for short
subdivisions as described in BIMC 2.16.070.I.2.
3. Duties of Surveyor. The duties of the surveyor shall be the same as those for a short
subdivision as described in BIMC 2.16.070.I.3.
4. Review, Recommendation, and Approval.
a. The city engineer shall review the final large lot subdivision to determine the
compliance with the requirements of RCW 58.17.160, the “City of Bainbridge Island
Engineering Design and Development Standards Manual” (except as varied by the
city engineer during the preliminary large lot review process), and any conditions
imposed on the approved preliminary subdivision plat, and forward written
recommendations for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval to the
director.
b. After receiving the city engineer’s recommendation pursuant to subsection G.4.a of
this section, the director shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the
final large lot subdivision.
c. The large lot subdivision shall be approved if the director determines that:
i. The final large lot plat meets all standards established by state law, this title
and related standards in BIMC Titles 15 through 18; and
ii. The proposed final large lot plat bears the certificates and statements of
approval required by the administrative manual; and
iii. The facilities and improvements required to be provided by the subdivider
have been completed or assurances in accordance with BIMC 2.16.070.N have
been provided.
d. If the application conforms to the criteria in subsection G.4.c of this section, the
director shall signify his or her approval by signing the approval line on the face of the
large lot subdivision. If the director disapproves the application, he or she shall
provide a written explanation to the applicant.
Page 60/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
H. Improvements.
1. All large lot subdivisions shall have the following improvements developed and/or
installed prior to recording the final plat:
a. Streets shall be cleared and grubbed; and
b. Streets shall be rocked or graveled to provide adequate year-round passage; and
5. Amendment of Disapproved Application. When an application is disapproved, an
applicant shall have the same rights to submit an amended application that apply to short
subdivisions as described in BIMC 2.16.070.I.5, except that any amended application filed
within the 180-day time frame shall be reviewed as set forth in this subsection G.
Page 61/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
c. Appropriate drainage, including erosion control, facilities consistent with
Chapters 15.20 and 15.21 BIMC shall be provided on a plan approved by the city
engineer prior to clearing and construction of any plat improvements.
2. All street rights-of-way within the large lot subdivision shall be dedicated to the city of
Bainbridge Island unless the only access between the large lot subdivision and a developed,
publicly owned road is a private road and there is no easement providing public access on
that private road. That dedication shall not reduce the number of parcels allowable in a
large lot subdivision if such parcels are based on a section subdivision and/or comprise
1/128th of a section or more.
3. On any approved large lot no further lot divisions shall be approved until the required
improvements are installed and approved by the city.
I. Assurance of Improvements. Large lot subdivisions shall be subject to the same requirements
for assurance of required improvements that apply to short subdivisions as described in
BIMC 2.16.070.N.
J. Modification of Preliminary or Final Large Lot Subdivisions before Filing.
1. An alteration to an approved preliminary large lot subdivision that does not change the
general plat layout, increase off-site impacts of the subdivision, or modify a provision or
condition that was a matter of dispute by any party during the preliminary approval process
may be made by the director after notice and opportunity to comment are provided to the
applicant and all parties of record. The director shall review and approve or disapprove the
request for modification following the process set forth in BIMC 2.16.030.
2. Other modifications to an approved large lot subdivision must be reviewed in
accordance with the process for a new large lot subdivision application, including payment
of fees, and shall be approved consistent with the procedures and requirements of this
chapter.
3. The following exemptions shall not constitute changes in the preliminary large lot
subdivision approval and do not require further review as provided for under subsections
J.1 or J.2 of this section:
a. Engineering detail, unless the proposed detail modifies or eliminates features
specifically required as an element of the preliminary large lot subdivision approval.
Page 62/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
For purposes of this section, “engineering detail” shall mean minor changes to
proposed road or lot grading or drainage design that do not significantly affect the
location of those facilities, and minor changes to locations of utility pipes, swales, or
wires that do not significantly affect their visibility from adjacent roads or properties;
and similar minor changes;
b. Minor changes in lot lines or lot dimensions; or
c. Minor alterations regarding homesite location and/or open space usage.
K. Disclaimer as to Streets. Streets within a large lot subdivision shall not be constructed or
maintained by the city unless such streets have been improved to current standards and have
been accepted into the city street system. Unless so improved and accepted, the responsibility for
maintenance shall lie with the owners of the lots. In such cases the face of each large lot
subdivision plat shall contain the following disclaimer:
Responsibility and expense for maintenance of roads leading to or serving lots within
this Large Lot Subdivision (unless such roads have been accepted into city’s road
system) shall rest with the lot owners.
L. Further Division. No lot in an approved large lot subdivision may be divided further within
five years of recording the approved final large lot subdivision plat without following the
subdivision requirements in effect at the time of such application. Short or long subdivision
procedures may apply, depending on the number of additional lots proposed to be created.
M. Requirements for Filing Plat. In addition to the requirements of subsections J and K of this
section, approved large lot subdivisions shall be subject to the same requirements for filing plats
that apply to short subdivisions as described in BIMC 2.16.070.K.
N. Amendment to Approved Large Lot Subdivision. Proposals for amendment of a large lot
subdivision shall follow the provisions of RCW 58.17.215. Alterations of a subdivision are also
subject to the provisions of RCW 64.04.175.
Page 63/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Exhibit G
BIMC 2.16.110
2.16.110 Major CUP Review procedures
A. Purpose. A major conditional use permit is a mechanism by which the city may require
specific conditions on development or the use of land to ensure that designated uses or activities
are compatible with other uses in the same zone and in the vicinity of the subject property. If
imposition of conditions will not make a specific proposal compatible the proposal shall be
denied.
B. Applicability.
1. As determined by the director, a major conditional use permit shall be secured from the
city prior to establishing or expanding a use according to situations that include, but are not
limited to: (a) the proposed use or expansion covers 50 percent or greater of the total lot
area; (b) the proposed use is accessed by a local or private road; (c) the proposed use or
expansion generates more than 36 total trips per day; (d) the proposed use or expansion
contains four or more units in a multifamily dwelling; or (e) requests for additional
nonresidential building height pursuant to Table 17.12.070-1, 18.12.020-2 or 18.12.020-3.
2. Any activity that is exempt from the request for a minor conditional use permit pursuant
to BIMC 2.16.050.B.2 is also exempt from the request for a major conditional use permit.
3. The provisions of this section supplement those of BIMC 2.16.020 and 2.16.100 when
the application is for a conditional use permit. In the event of a conflict between the
provisions of BIMC 2.16.020 or 2.16.100 and this section, the provisions of this section
shall govern.
4. Temporary uses and events may be exempt from some or all of the major conditional use
permit requirements if the director determines that their impacts on the immediately
surrounding area will be minimal.
C. General Procedures. Major conditional uses shall be approved through the general procedures
applicable to quasi-judicial decisions by the hearing examiner in BIMC 2.16.100 except as
described below.
D. Review Procedures – Proposal Stage. Review of major conditional use permit proposals shall
include all of the following in the order listed:
Page 64/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 meeting 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 administrative manual and
include a statement of intent, site analysis, and context map. An applicant may request a waiver
from the conceptual proposal review if the applicant demonstrates knowledge and understanding
of the city’s permit processing procedures.
32. 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 application.
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 make known the potential need and
rationale for any departure from the design standards and guidelines and construction standards
and specifications. Submittal requirements are described in the administrative manual and
include a schematic design and completed design guidelines checklist. 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
Page 65/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 major conditional use permit applications
shall include all of the following:
1. Application. An applicant may submit an application for a major conditional use permit 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 including design review submittals.
2. Review by Design Review Board. Upon receipt of the application and determination of
completeness, the Director shall schedule the applicant on the next available agenda for a Design
Review Board meeting. The applicant shall make a presentation to the Design Review Board per
the requirements of the Design Review Board manual. The Design Review Board reviews the
project materials and makes a recommendation on project consistency with Design for
Bainbridge standards. A Design Review Board recommendation is not a final decision and
therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. The Design Review Board’s
recommendation will be forwarded to the Planning Department and may include recommended
changes to the design (to be evaluated by staff before issuing the permit) as well as
recommended conditions on the permit related to design. Any recommended changes to the
design or conditions on the permit must be intended to achieve consistency with one or more
specific standards in the Design for Bainbridge manual.
23. Review and Recommendation by Planning Commission.
a. In the case of a major conditional use permit 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 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.
Page 66/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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.
f. A planning commission recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal
of the recommendation.
34. Review by Director.
a. The director shall review the application materials, staff report, and the
recommendations of the planning commission and shall prepare a report to the hearing
examiner recommending approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the
application.
b. The planning commission’s recommendation shall hold substantial weight in the
consideration of the application by the director. Any deviation from that
recommendation shall be documented in the director’s report.
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
iv. Conflicts with requirements of local, state, or federal law.
45. Review and Public Hearing with Hearing Examiner.
a. The hearing examiner shall consider the application materials and the director’s
recommendation at a public hearing following the procedures of BIMC 2.16.100.C
and applicable provisions of BIMC 2.16.020.
Page 67/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
b. The hearing examiner shall make compliance with the recommendations of the
planning commission a condition of approval, unless the hearing examiner 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 hearing examiner shall adopt a planning commission recommendation of denial
of an application unless the hearing examiner 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
iv. Conflicts with requirements of local, state, or federal law.
d. The hearing examiner may approve, approve with conditions, deny, or remand an
application.
F. Decision Criteria. A conditional use may be approved or approved with conditions if:
1. The conditional use is consistent with applicable design guidelines in BIMC Title 18.
The conditional use is compatible with the established and intended character of the
neighborhood, considering factors that include, but are not limited to, hours of operation,
the type of activities generated by the use, and the predictable levels of any adverse
impacts; and
Page 68/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
2. The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the vicinity
of the subject property; and
3. The conditional use is consistent with the comprehensive plan and other applicable
adopted community plans, including the Island-Wide Transportation Plan; and
4. The conditional use complies with all other applicable provisions of the BIMC; and
5. All necessary measures have been taken to eliminate or reduce to the greatest extent
possible the impacts that the proposed use may have on the vicinity of the subject property;
and
6. Noise levels shall be in compliance with BIMC 16.16.020 and 16.16.040.A; and
7. The streets and nonmotorized facilities as proposed are adequate to accommodate
anticipated traffic; and
8. The city engineer has determined that the conditional use meets the following decision
criteria:
a. The conditional use conforms to regulations concerning drainage in
Chapters 15.20 and 15.21 BIMC; and
b. The conditional use 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 use will have an adverse impact on traffic, including
nonmotorized traffic, the impact shall be mitigated as required by the city engineer;
and
e. If the conditional use will rely on public water or sewer services, there is capacity in
the water or sewer system (as applicable) to serve the conditional use, and the required
service(s) can be made available at the site; and
Page 69/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
f. The conditional use conforms to the “City of Bainbridge Island Engineering Design
and Construction Standards and Specifications” unless the city engineer has approved
a deviation to the standards; and
9. The Kitsap public health district has determined that the conditional use 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 or disapproval of the application the
health district shall so advise the director; and
10. The Bainbridge Island fire department has reviewed the application and determined that
the conditional use will ensure fire protection.
11. If a major conditional use is processed as a housing design demonstration project
pursuant to BIMC 2.16.020.S, the above criteria will be considered in conjunction with the
purpose, goals, policies, and decision criteria of BIMC 2.16.020.S.
12. A conditional use may be approved, or recommended for approval, with conditions. If
no reasonable conditions can be imposed that ensure the permit meets the decision criteria
of this chapter, then the permit shall be denied.
G. Additional Decision Criteria for Institutions in Residential Zones. Applications to locate any
of those uses categorized as educational facilities, governmental facilities, religious facilities,
health care facilities, cultural facilities, or clubs in Table 18.09.020 in residential zones shall be
processed as major conditional use permits and shall be required to meet the following criteria, in
addition to those in subsection F of this section:
1. All sites must front on roads classified as residential suburban, collector, or arterial on
the Bainbridge Island functional road classification map.
2. The scale of proposed construction including bulk and height and architectural design
features is compatible with the surrounding area.
Page 70/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
3. If the facility will have attendees and employees numbering fewer than 50 or an
assembly seating area of less than 50, the director may waive any or all the above
requirements in this subsection G, but may not waive those required elsewhere in the
BIMC.
H. Approval of Additional Height.
1. In the NC zone district a maximum height of 45 feet can be approved through the major
conditional use permit process if the director determines that all conditional use permit
requirements are met and that: (a) view opportunities are not substantially reduced; (b) fire
flow is adequate; and (c) solar access of neighboring lots is not substantially reduced.
2. In the B/I zone district a maximum height of 45 feet can be approved through the major
conditional use process if the director determines that all conditional use permit
requirements are met and that: (a) view opportunities are not substantially reduced; (b) fire
flow is adequate; (c) solar access of neighboring lots is not reduced; and (d) the appearance
of the neighborhood will not substantially change.
3. In the WD-I zone district a maximum height of 45 feet can be approved through the
major conditional use process if the director determines that all conditional use permit
requirements are met and that: (a) view opportunities are not substantially reduced; (b) fire
flow is adequate; (c) solar access of neighboring lots is not reduced; and (d) each setback
requirement shall be increased one foot for each additional foot of building height allowed.
In portions of the WD-I district located within the shoreline jurisdiction regulated by
Chapter 16.12 BIMC, a shoreline variance may be needed before additional height can be
approved.
I. Effect of Approval.
1. Once a conditional use permit is approved, no building, use or development shall occur
contrary to that specified in the conditional use permit.
2. The owner shall record a declaration with the Kitsap County auditor showing the land to
be bound by a conditional use permit. No building permit shall be issued for structures
other than those specified in the conditional use approval.
a. The declaration shall reference the official files of the city through which the permit
was granted; and
Page 71/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
b. The declaration shall be a covenant running with the land; and
c. No building permit shall be issued unless such declaration is recorded.
J. Amendments to Approved Major Conditional Use Permit.
1. Minor adjustments to an approved major conditional use permit may be made after
review and approval by the director. Minor adjustments are those that entail small changes
in dimensions or siting of structures or the location of public amenities, but do not entail
changes to the intensity or character of the use.
2. Major adjustments to an approved major conditional use permit require an amended
application and shall be processed in the same manner as a new conditional use permit
application. Major adjustments are those that change the basic design, intensity, density,
and/or use.
Page 72/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Exhibit H
BIMC 2.16.125
11. 2.16.125 Long Subdivisions Review procedures
A. Purpose. This section provides a procedure for review and approval of preliminary long
subdivision applications in compliance with the provisions of RCW Title 58, BIMC Title 17, and
other applicable provisions of Washington State law and this municipal code.
B. Applicability. This procedure applies to all applications for preliminary long subdivisions.
Long subdivisions involve the division or redivision of land into more than four lots.
C. General Procedures.
1. Long subdivisions shall be approved through the quasi-judicial hearing examiner
approval procedures described in BIMC 2.16.100 except as described below.
2. The provisions of this section shall supplement those of
BIMC 2.16.020 and 2.16.030 when the application is for a long subdivision. 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.
3. Vesting. A proposed long subdivision shall be considered under the subdivision
ordinance, zoning or other land use control ordinances, and the State Environmental Policy
Act in effect at the time a fully completed application for preliminary approval of the
subdivision has been submitted to the city. The requirements for a fully completed
application shall be defined by the administrative manual.
4. Timeline for Review. The city has 90 calendar days from the filing of a complete
application in which to approve, disapprove, or return the application to the applicant for
modification. The timeline for review can be extended beyond 90 calendar days if the city
determines it has incomplete or insufficient application materials and/or if there are
significant changes to application materials. If no action can be taken to approve or
disapprove the application within the 90 calendar days, the director must notify the
applicant of the reasons for the delay and steps necessary to complete the application.
D. Review Procedures – Proposal Stage. Review of long subdivision proposals shall include all
of the following in the order listed:
Page 73/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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 and administrative manual, and include a statement of intent, site analysis, and
context map. An applicant may request a waiver from the conceptual proposal review meeting if
the applicant demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the city’s permit processing
procedures.
32. 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 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 and the administrative
manual and include documentation of the four-step design process, schematic design, and
completed subdivision design guidelines checklist. The four-step design process includes:
a. Delineate Natural Space. The applicant shall prioritize natural resources on the site in terms of
their highest to least appropriateness for inclusion in the proposed natural area. On the basis of
those priorities and practical considerations given to the site’s configuration, its context in
relation to natural areas on adjoining and neighboring properties, and the applicant’s subdivision
objectives, natural space shall be delineated in a manner clearly indicating boundaries as well as
the types of resources. The amount of natural space required is provided in Chapter 17.12 BIMC.
b. Locate Homesites and Community Space. After delineating natural space, homesite areas and
community space shall be identified (a “sketch” diagram is acceptable), using the site analysis
Page 74/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
and context maps produced for the conceptual proposal review meeting as a base map. The
amount of community space required is provided in Chapter 17.12 BIMC.
c. Define Access. After locating the natural space, homesites, and community space, the access
network shall be defined. The access network shall provide a safe, convenient, and efficient
system for vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation and minimize impacts on proposed
natural space.
d. Draw Lot Lines. Upon completion of the preceding three steps, draw lot lines to delineate the
boundaries of individual lots.
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 long subdivision applications shall include
all of the following:
1. Application. An applicant may submit an application for a long subdivision 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.
Page 75/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
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. The purpose of the planning commission review and recommendation meeting is to review a
proposed project for consistency with applicable design guidelines, BIMC Titles 17 and 18, and
the comprehensive plan.
b. 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 and all other applicable law, and the
recommendation of the design review board. If the applicable criteria are not met, the planning
commission shall recommend that the proposal be modified or denied.
c. 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.
dc. 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, conclusions, and
recommendation will be included in the staff report transmitted to the director.
d. The planning commission shall review and recommend requests for departures from the
applicable subdivision standards for long subdivisions pursuant to the criteria in BIMC
17.12.040.
e. A planning commission recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal
of the recommendation.
Page 76/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
Exhibit I
BIMC 17.12.040
17.12.040 Administrative Departures
A. A departure from existing subdivision standards may be requested only by an applicant to
allow use of an alternative standard not listed among the applicable requirements of
BIMC 17.12.050 through 17.12.070. Departures are not variances and are not required to meet
the criteria associated with a variance application. Rather, departures allow adjustment of
existing standards to achieve better outcomes in cases where strict application of the existing
standard would result in an inferior subdivision design.
B. Departures from the subdivision standards in BIMC 17.12.050 through 17.12.070 may be
permitted as part of the subdivision review process. In order for such a departure to be allowed, it
must satisfy the intent of the four-step design process, and the resulting subdivision must be
consistent with the general purpose and intent of the subdivision ordinance and the specific
standard(s). A departure shall not be allowed from the following standards:
1. Natural area;
2. Community space;
3. Homesite size.
C. Any request for one or more departures shall be made at the design guidance review meeting
as part of the preapplication phase of the project the time of application. Departures shall be
reviewed concurrently with review of a preliminary application for subdivision application. The
design review board may include an administrative departure in its recommendation to the
planning commission Departures may be granted if all of the following criteria are met:
1. Because of unusual shape, exceptional topographic conditions, environmental constraints or
other extraordinary situation or condition in connection with a specific piece of property, strict
adherence to the existing standard would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships
inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of the subdivision ordinance as provided in
BIMC 17.04.010;
2. The granting of the departure results in a subdivision with greater natural resource
conservation value, less adverse impact to adjoining properties, or more practical design because
of topography, critical area, or other extenuating circumstance; and
Page 77/77
4867-9011-5068, v. 6
}
3. All possible efforts to comply with the standard or minimize potential harm or adverse impacts
have been undertaken. Economic consideration may be taken into account but shall not be the
overriding factor in approval; and
4. The departure is consistent with other applicable regulations and standards; and
5. The granting of any departure will not be unduly detrimental to the public welfare nor
injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.
D. If the design review board’s recommendation is to grant the departure(s), the departure shall
be included as a component of the project in subsequent reviews pursuant to BIMC 2.16.110.D.1
and 2.16.110.E. the dDeparture(s) shall be included in the staff report to the director in the case
of a short subdivision, or in the director’s recommendation to the hearing examiner in the case of
a long subdivision. unless a deviation from the recommendation is documented in the director’s
report pursuant to BIMC 2.16.110.E.3.b.
E. The Director shall review and make recommendations for departures from the applicable
subdivision standards for two lot short subdivisions. The planning commission shall review and
make recommendations for departures from the applicable subdivision standards for three or
more lot short subdivisions and large subdivisions. Any and all recommendations for departures
shall made by pursuant to the criteria set forth by this chapter. For short subdivisions not
requiring design review board review, request for departures shall be made at the preapplication
conference. The director may approve one or more departures, if the criteria in subsection C of
this section are met, as part of their administrative decision for the preliminary subdivision in
accordance with BIMC 2.16.070.F.
DESIGN FOR BAINBRIDGE
2025
DESIGN REVIEW
MANUAL
1
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Todd Thiel
Elaine Liffgens
Marc Aubin
Gregory Hunt
Howard Howlett
CITY COUNCIL
Leslie Schneider
Joe Deets
Brenda Fantroy-Johnson
Kirsten Hytopoulos
Ashley Mathews
Clarence Moriwaki
Jon Quitslund
2021 VERSION DONE BY
Framework, Berger Partnership, and Coates Design Architects (see Appendix C)
CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND STAFF
Patty Charnas, Director of Planning and Community Development
HB Harper, Planning Manager
2
DESIGN FOR BAINBRIDGE
The Island 04
Goals + Principles 06
How to Use this Document 08
Definitions 10
DESIGN REVIEW
Process 13
CONTEXT ANALYSIS AND ARCHITECTURAL
NARRATIVE
Design Process 15
DESIGN STANDARDS
Introduction 16
Site Design 17
Public Realm 22
Building Design 27 Landscape 31
STREET TYPES & FRONTAGES
Introduction 38
Street Types 39
Building Frontages 51
SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS
Introduction 56
Larger Sites 57
Historic Places 58
APPENDIX 62
1
2
3
4
5
6
3
The Island
Bainbridge Island is a close -knit community
with several neighborhood centers and a lively,
walkable downtown in Winslow with a mix of
shops, services and activities. The Island attracts
residents and visitors with its magnificent natural
setting and mix of rural and small-town charm, all
a short ferry commute from Downtown Seattle.
The City’s residents are committed to preserving
the Island’s sense of community and green
spaces, and deeply value the Island’s natural
lands, shorelines and enduring connection to
local agriculture.
The City’s Design Standards are based on
the existing policies, principles and values
established in Bainbridge Island’s Comprehensive
Plan and through community engagement. Each
of these values and principles as they relate to
the design of new development is articulated
in the following section, and the standards
draw on these principles and offer specific
guidance to inform design at various scales and
stages, including site design, building design
and composition, and architectural detailing.
The Standards were carefully crafted to ensure
that new development reflects Bainbridge
Island’s common values and culture, and that
it contributes to and enhances the City’s built
environment.
DESIGN ON
BAINBRIDGE
4
PAGE 2 // DESIGN ON BAINBRIDGE 5
Values + Principles
DESIGN FOR BAINBRIDGE
Bainbridge Island’s architecture is diverse, spanning a range of eras and architectural styles, but
its urban fabric maintains a defining character and continuity within its varied buildings, streets
and neighborhoods. Good design is the thoughtful composition of buildings, landscape and
public spaces that creates a meaningful relationship to a building’s surroundings and contributes
to the public realm and neighborhood fabric. These standards define the responsibility of new
development as respecting neighborhood context, responding sensitively to the surrounding
built and natural environment, and contributi ng to the community.
DESIGN FOR SUSTAINABILITY & CLIMATE RESILIENCE
Bainbridge residents cherish the Island’s natural environment and are committed to protecting
and restoring the ecological and hydrological functions of its natural lands and water bodies.
Sustainable design and green building practices help reduce the burden of development on
natural systems and help ensure Bainbridge Island is climate resilient. Concentrating growth in
the Island’s urban center through the zoning code and around shared infrastructure conserves
natural habitat, ecological functions, open space and areas designed for recreational use. Specific
elements of site design, building design, construction, and operation, such as efficient use of
energy and water, integration of renewable energy, and use of sustainable and ethical materials
can mitigate the environmental toll of new development and address local climate vulnerabilities.
Goals +
Principles
The Bainbridge Island
community values
authenticity and design that
is specific to Bainbridge.
Generic approaches to
design for sites, streets,
buildings, and other
elements are inconsistent
with the island character and
values.
6
DESIGN FOR A CONNECTED COMMUNITY
Part of a safe, healthy and sustainable community is a walkable, bikeable and transit-friendly
built environment that encourages active transportation. Walkable, bike- and transit-friendly
development that reduces reliance on cars can help improve air quality and help residents live
healthier more active lives. New development should support alternative travel modes and
contribute to an individual’s connection to place. Thoughtful design can further both these
goals enhancing the public realm that ties together the ity’s buildings, which in turn improves the
experience of walking and biking.
HEALTH, EQUITY, AND INCLUSION
Healthy housing development and expansion of educational and civic institutions support diverse
and inclusive growth and help build thriving neighborhood centers. Design can have an effect
not only on the community’s look and feel, but also on housing affordability for people of different
means, and the comfort of people from different backgrounds. Building an accessible community
that supports transit and that creates a quality pedestrian experience can help grow employment
locally, improve quality of life, and lay the foundation for a more diverse community.
DESIGN TO FOSTER CULTURE AND SOCIAL WELL-BEING
The contributions of Bainbridge Island’s residents through the arts, agriculture, and active
organizations are a piece of what defines the City. Bainbridge Island’s rich history and dynamic
cultural life are supported by the City’s buildings, parks, and public spaces. They represent the
community’s experiences and foster a robust public life in Bainbridge Island’s downtown, in
distinct neighborhoods, and in the Island's rural areas. New development should contribute to
and create spaces that are accessible and reflect local culture and identity.
DESIGN FOR CONNECTIONS TO THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Bainbridge Island’s natural environment is not simply a scenic backdrop for its built environment
— the two are intimately connected. New development should draw inspiration from and
preserve natural areas, responding to natural features like slopes, streams, heritage trees, and
wetlands in ways that minimize disturbance and leave ecological functions intact.
7
How to Use this Document
Design for Bainbridge provides guidance for
applicants to successfully navigate the design
review process. This section highlights key
elements of the design review process to
improve clarity and predictability for the City,
applicants, and the public.
When is Design Review
Required?
The Bainbridge Island Municipal Code (BIMC)
specifies when design review is required in
Table 2.16.010-1: Summary Table of Land Use
Procedures. The requirement for design review
is based on the type of land use review required
for the type of development or other activities
proposed.
Design review is required for the following project
types:
a. Major site plan and design review
b. Major conditional use permits
c. Minor site plan and design review within
the Winslow subarea
Design review is optional for the following project
types:
a. Minor site plan and design review outside the
Winslow subarea
b. Minor conditional use permits
The development of single-family homes and
minor activities or improvements like routine
maintenance, interior work, or projects that don’t
require a building permit, or a change of use are
exempt.
Design Intent and Design Standards
Design for Bainbridge includes both Design
Intent and Design Standards. Design Intent
represents the overall design goal; Design
Standards are clearly defined, mandatory
requirements of all projects. For a project to
be approved, it must comply with all
applicable Design Standards. The project’s
designers must demonstrate, through
graphics, writing, and oral presentation, how
the project’s spatial, material, and cultural
concepts comply with the Design Standards.
8
Relationship to Other
Regulations, and Permit Review
Design review is part of an integrated land use
and development review process. As described in
Chapter 2, the first step is a pre-application
conference, in which materials are provided to
the design review board. Up to two members of
the Design Review Board may attend the pre-
application conference with the intent of
listening to and reporting the proposal to the full
Design Review Board. Applicants may then submit
for land use permits after the pre-application
conference is complete; after a land use
application submittal has been deemed
complete, the materials are forwarded to the
Design Review Board, and the project is
scheduled on the next available Design Review
Board meeting agenda. The Design Review
Board (DRB), in coordination with City staff, is
responsible for design review which focuses on
compliance with Design Standards contained in
this document. The final permit decision varies
by the permit type but is typically made by the
Planning Director or the City’s Hearing
Examiner. For more information on the permit
review processes please refer to the City’s
Administrative Manual and Municipal Code:
• Zoning BIMC 18
• Subdivisions BIMC 17
• Building BIMC 15
• Shoreline BIMC 16.12
• Critical Areas BIMC 16.20
• SEPA BIMC 16.04
Departures
Design for Bainbridge is intended to provide
flexibility in meeting the Design Standards.
However, there may be circumstances where
the applicant proposes a design solution that
meets the guiding principles and intent of the
standards but is not in strict compliance.
Departures may be approved by the final
decision-maker with a recommendation on
approval or denial by the DRB for projects under
their review.
Any request for one or more departures shall be
made at the Design Review Board meeting .
The Design Review Board may include
departures in its recommendation to the Planning
Commission, if one of the following criteria are
met. Departures from the design standards may
be approved based on the following criteria:
a. The departure is related to a variance from
a standard in the BIMC that also impacts the
ability to meet one or more of the design
standards;
b. The departure meets the intent of the design
standards and the proposed departure is
equal or greater to complying with the design
standard;
c. The granting of the departure results in
a project with greater natural resource
conservation value, less adverse impact to
adjoining properties, or more practical design
because of topography, critical area, or other
extenuating circumstance.
9
Definitions
The definitions contained in this section are
applicable only to this document and its contents.
For complete list of definitions, visit BIMC 18.36.
Active means fostering human activity and
interaction, often to describe streets and public
spaces with pedestrian traffic, events and
programming, or uses that draw, facilitate, or serve
as a backdrop for human interactions such as
shops and restaurants.
Built Environment means the parts of our physical
surroundings that are created by and for humans
and serve as the setting for human activity.
Character is the distinctive qualities of a place,
building or street.
Civic Uses are public buildings or institutions
owned and operated by governmental or other
public agencies. This includes government offices,
courthouses, police and fire stations, and schools.
Context is the physical (including natural and
human-made) and cultural environment around
a specific site and how the site relates to those
surroundings. Every architectural work exists
in the presence of a multitude of contexts
that can impart meanings to and, in turn,
derive meaning from their association with a
project.
Development means all structures and other
modifications of the natural landscape (both
above and below ground) on a particular site.
Design Standards mandate planning and design
actions that the applicant must incorporate
in their project application. Compliance with
standards is mandatory and failure to meet a
mandatory standard may be used as a basis for
the City’s denial of a project application.
Fenestration is the arrangement, proportioning,
and design of windows and doors in a building.
Frontage means street-facing façade of a building
and its relationship to the street.
Heat Island Effect is the tendency for built areas
to be hotter than their surroundings because of
absorbed solar radiation and lack of vegetation, in
particular, trees.
Human Scale is the scale at which humans can
comfortably interact with their environment based
on the physical and cognitive characteristics and
capabilities of the human body.
Impervious Surface means a non-vegetated
surface area which either prevents or retards
the entry of water into the soil mantle as under
natural conditions prior to development and/
or a hard surface area which causes water to
run off the surface in greater quantities or at an
increased rate of flow from the flow present under
natural conditions prior to development. Common
impervious surfaces include, but are not limited
to, roof tops, walkways, patios, driveways, parking
lots or storage areas, concrete or asphalt paving,
gravel roads, packed earthen materials, and
oiled macadam or other surfaces which similarly
impede the natural infiltration of stormwater.
Massing: the shape, form and size of buildings.
Natural Systems such as ecosystems or water and nutrient
cycles are systems that exist in nature independent of
human involvement and are composed of physical and
biological materials and processes.
Permeable materials allow stormwater to infiltrate
into the ground.
10
Public Realm means the spaces around, between
and within buildings that are publicly accessible,
both physically and visually, and support public
life and social interaction.
Resilience or climate resilience is the ability to
anticipate, prepare for, and respond to hazardous
events, trends, or disturbances related to climate.
Stormwater Runoff is the rainfall that flows over
land, paved surfaces, and building rooftops.
Right-of-Way means all public streets and
property granted or reserved for, or dedicated
to, public use for streets, walkways, sidewalks,
bikeways, parking, and horse trails, whether
improved or unimproved, including the air rights,
subsurface rights, and related easements.
Scale means a proportionate size, extent, degree,
or level of detail typically in relation to a standard
point of reference. Scale is dependent on
context.
Stormwater Infiltration is the process by which
rainfall and stormwater runoff flows into and
through the subsurface soil.
Sense of Place is the relationship with the place
and its identity as felt by residents and visitors and
shaped through experiences of a place's natural,
human-made, cultural, and historical features.
Street Types are the classifications for each street
on the Island according to common functions and
existing or desired characteristics. The permitted
building frontages for each Street Type specify
setback requirements and treatments between
the building and the right-of-way.
Transpiration is the process by which water
moves through a plant and evaporates into the
atmosphere from its leaves and exterior surfaces.
11
SUSTAINABILITY DEFINED
The term “sustainability” has become a frequently used buzz word. Sometimes it is even used in
an attempt to “green wash” a project or a proposal. Because sustainability is such a fundamental
value in Bainbridge Island's design standards, a clear definition is needed. In common parlance,
sustainability is defined as follows:
The ability to be maintained at a certain rate or level. Common examples are: “the sustainability of
economic growth”; “the long-term sustainability of the project.”
In the realm of ecology and the survival of the planet and all its inhabitants, sustainability is best
defined in the context of living systems. Thus, “sustainability” means, simply, “to align with natural
forces, or at least not to defy them,” and is about everything we do as humans. To use the phrase
“environmental sustainability,” for example, or “sustainable agriculture” or a “sustainable economy,”
while grammatically correct, does not exemplify the true definition of, nor foster application of the
real meaning of, sustainability. Sustainability, properly used, is about the entire planet as a living
system, including all life forms.
Viewing a community as a living system recognizes that the “rules of the house” are non-
negotiable biophysical principles and the elements of sustainability rest upon those principles.
To further understand this approach to community, it helps to know that “ecology” and
“economics” have the same root: eco from the Greek oikos, or home. Ecology is the knowledge
or understanding of the house, and economics is the management of the house—and it is the
same house. Therefore, understanding our community as a living system—an ecosystem—will
give us not only a new understanding of “economy” and “economics,” but also will foster a vision
of the future, along with strategies for its realization, that focus on resiliency, adaptability, and
attunement with nature.
If we perceive ourselves and all we create as part of an ecosystem, it is easy to understand that
our community is a living system within which there are nodes of wealth: social, natural and
financial. All interact as a system and are linked together through nutrient cycles and energy
flows, and the maintenance and health of these networks is essential to the overall health and
prosperity of our community.
- Jane Rein, Design Review Board
12
Design Review
Process Preapplication Conference
The Preapplication Conference with City staff is intended to
provide information to the applicant in response to the submittal
of a preliminary site plan and a conceptual design for the project,
showing how it responds to site characteristics and the context of
neighboring uses. City staff shall identify potential issues/concerns
related to applicable City development regulations and standards
including, but not limited to, zoning, environmental, utilities,
transportation and stormwater regulations, relevant Comprehensive
Plan goals and policies, and relevant goals and principles from
Design for Bainbridge. Up to two members of the Design Review
Board may attend the preapplication conference with the intent of
listening and reporting the proposal to the full Design Review Board
at a subsequent meeting.
City staff shall ensure that the applicant is aware of the standards
and criteria involved in review and approval of the project, both in
the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code and the Design for Bainbridge
manual. Planning staff shall prepare a summary letter detailing
the pre-application guidance, to be provided to the applicant and
the Design Review Board.
DESIGN
REVIEW
1
13
Public Participation Meeting
Before application, applicants shall make a formal and c complete presentation of their concept(s) to the public
at a Planning Commission meeting, providing the applicant with an opportunity to respond to questions and
comments from the public and Planning Commissioners.
Application Submittal
See Appendix A for a complete list of submittal requirements.
Design Review and Recommendation
At this meeting, the Board will complete the review of submitted drawings and ensure that the project
reflects compliance with the design standards. The Board will document its findings and transmit a signed
written recommendation.
The Board's recommendation may include conditions to ensure compliance with all standards. If a majority of
the Board members find that standards essential to the project’s success have not been met, the Board shall
recommend denial of the project.
2
3
4
14
Design Process
Submittal requirements including a context
analysis drawing and a written architectural
narrative serve as the basis for Design Review
Board’s understanding of the driving forces
behind the architectural design of a project.
Context analysis ensures project applicants and
review board members have a thorough
understanding of all aspects of the site, giving
rise to a design that fits with and contributes to
Bainbridge Island’s unique built and natural
environments.
An effective context analysis will carefully
examine the relationship between the site,
potential development, and the surrounding
environment.
When paired with the Architectural Narrative,
the context analysis creates a foundation for a
design that takes cues from patterns in the
surroundings, and contributes to the Island’s
unique character, while preserving, supporting,
and repairing the natural environment.
Applicants are encouraged to tie all elements of
design and project choices to both the context
analysis and Architectural Narrative such that
the Design Review Board can follow a cohesive
thread throughout an applicant’s presentation
and materials during the Design Review Board
meeting.
CONTEXT
15
Introduction
The Design Standards establish the minimum
requirements in Design for Bainbridge
necessary to take advantage of the
opportunities of the surrounding context and
site while contributing to the neighborhood.
SITE DESIGN STANDARDS
S1 Natural Systems
S2 Wildlife Habitat
S3 Systems of Movement
S4 Public Realm
PUBLIC REALM STANDARDS
P1 Walking & Cycling
P2 Vehicles in the Public Realm
P3 Connections to Public Spaces
P4 Block & Frontage Patterns
P5 Activity on Commercial Streets
BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS
B1 Sustainable Design
B2 Materials & Detailing
LANDSCAPE STANDARDS
L1 Landscape & Architecture
L2 Public Realm
L3 Sustainable Features
L4 Green Infrastructure
L5 Wildlife Habitat
L6 Views & View Corridors
4 DESIGN STANDARDS
16
SSITE DESIGN STANDARDS
Building on an
understanding of the
site and its context,
site design defines
how a building relates
to its context. The
placement, orientation
and massing of
buildings should
support broader
patterns in Bainbridge
Island’s built and
natural environment
as well as livable
neighborhoods and
communities.
Protect and repair natural
systems
Preserve and enrich wildlife
habitat
Fit the project into the systems of
access and movement, prioritizing
pedestrians and bicycles
Support and contribute to a
vibrant public realm S 4
S3
S2
S1
17
PROTECT AND REPAIR NATURAL
SYSTEMS
a. Use natural topography to inform project
design, stepping up or down hillsides.
b. Minimize soil disturbance and excavation, and
preserve natural topsoil.
c. Preserve the hydrological functions of the
site and create opportunities for natural
stormwater infiltration.
d. Incorporate natural water features, habitat,
and native plant communities on-site into
project design so that they are ecologically
functional.
e. Minimize and disconnect impervious cover to
reduce runoff.
The Bullitt Center in Seattle integrates native vegetation
Intent
existing natural systems and mitigate disturbance
repair the Island’s natural systems that have
been impacted by previous development. Site
design should embrace relationships to larger
natural systems, and use these systems to inform
sustainable design at the site and building level.
STANDARDS
S1
18
PRESERVE, RESTORE AND ENRICH
WILDLIFE HABITAT
Intent
Urban growth often comes at the expense of
natural habitat, degrading and fragmenting
sensitive plant communities, wetlands, and
riparian corridors that provide habitat for local
fish, wildlife and pollinators. New development
in Bainbridge Island should protect and restore
habitat on site and connect to local habitat
corridors.
STANDARDS
a. Incorporate existing natural habitat and
landscape into site design.
b. Connect new landscaped areas and
fragmented habitat to networks of open
space and larger habitat corridors wherever
possible.
c. If fencing is proposed at property edges,
utilize porous fencing or hedging and shrubs
with gaps to reduce barriers to wildlife.
d. Repair gaps in identified wildlife corridors
wherever possible.
Island Wood on Bainbridge Island is built to preserve and
study wildlife habitat, with native plantings
complementing existing natural features.
Cedar Creek Watershed Education Center in North Bend,
maintains a continuous wildlife habitat along the shore of
Rattlesnake lake with green roofs and native plantings.
S2
19
FIT THE PROJECT INTO THE SYSTEMS OF
ACCESS AND MOVEMENT, PRIORITIZING
PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES
a. Locate and orient primary pedestrian access
to the site toward major pedestrian and
bicycle travel routes and transit facilities.
b. Incorporate dedicated pedestrian access that
connects and aligns with existing public and
private pedestrian infrastructure.
c. Integrate access for people of all abilities
into the project design so that all visitors are
welcome through primary entries and access
points.
d. Locate at-grade parking and vehicular access
away from active pedestrian areas wherever
possible and screen at-grade parking from
public view.
e. Provide bicycle parking near access points
to and active areas to maximize visibility and
convenience.
f. If project includes public space, ensure it is
pedestrian-oriented to facilitate informal
community gathering.
g. All public areas shall be easily navigable for
individuals of all ages and abilities.
The Oliver at Wyatt and Madison has integrated
pedestrian access making for a convenient and pleasant
walk from street to interior.
Intent
bicycle scale, and carefully consider the
project's
and location of vehicular access. Projects should
prioritize the pedestrian environment and encourage
sustainable transportation choices.
STANDARDS
S3
20
SUPPORT AND CONTRIBUTE TO A VIBRANT PUBLIC REALM
a. Arrange site elements to define a clear
‘public front’ facing toward the primary street.
b. Incorporate natural systems into public
spaces in the site where possible and
appropriate.
c. Create a comfortable and inviting scale
for pedestrians, using elements like
benches, canopies, and landscaping.
Individual pedestrian entries must be emphasized
by using all of the following:
• Provide a porch, at least 24 square feet,
or other architectural weather
protection that provides cover for a
person entering the unit and a
transitional space between outside and
inside the dwelling.
• Provide a planted area in front of each
pedestrian entry of at least 20 square
feet in area, with no dimension less
than three feet.
• Provide a combination of shrubs,
groundcover or trees.
• Pedestrian walks shall be separated
from structures by at least three feet
for landscaping.
Intent
the site planning level. Some projects will be
passing by. Residential development will have a
relationship to passers-by and visitors as well as
the residents. Retail buildings and civic buildings
have important relationships to the public realm,
where dedicated space may be warranted. For
all of these project types, the visual and physical
relationship to the public realm begins at the
site planning level for the most appropriate and
beneficial interaction with the community.
STANDARDS
S4
21
PP UBLI C REALM STANDARDS
P1
Bainbridge Island’s
network of streets,
trails and public
spaces are the setting
for public life in the
city. They support
community events
and local activities,
build the experience
of the Island and
express local identity.
New development
should contribute to
streetscapes, public and
open spaces, and street
frontages, and foster
activity at street level
where appropriate.
Create a safe and comfortable
environment for walking and
cycling.
Minimize impact of vehicles on
the public realm
Strengthen public space
connections
Foster interest and activity along
commercial streets P 4
P3
P2
22
CREATE A SAFE AND COMFORTABLE
ENVIRONMENT FOR WALKING AND CYCLING
Intent
Whether a project is located in the Island's
downtown, neighborhood centers, or rural areas,
new development should consider the site's
relationship to the pedestrian environment, and
how the project can contribute to safety, comfort
and continuity in the pedestrian realm.
STANDARDS
a. Connect on-site pedestrian walkways with
existing public or private routes where
projects can improve the network for people
walking.
b. Integrate lighting for pedestrian pathways
and entrances to provide safety, mark entry
locations and highlight design features.
c. Orient primary entrances toward the site’s
most active public street frontage.
d. Contribute to the network of safe bicycle
routes where possible.
e. Provide bicycle parking at access points to
open spaces and buildings, and coordinate
bike racks and fixtures with other outdoor
furniture on site, along adjacent streets, or
nearby public spaces.
f. Canopies or other coverings are required on
building frontages abutting public streets
and sidewalks.
This outdoor dining area connects pedestrian walkways
with access to businesses and waterfront trails,
providing a robust network for people walking.
The Camelia Apartments in Bainbridge Island integrate
public walkways through the site with landscaping to
provide access to Island Village and Hildebrand Lane.
P1
23
MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF VEHICLES
ON THE PUBLIC REALM
a. Screen service and utility uses and
parking when near public space using
ground floor uses and/or landscaping.
b. Create clearly defined pedestrian paths
through parking areas with sidewalks or
other dedicated facilities.
P2
Intent
Public realm design should focus on people rather
than cars and vehicular access. Projects should
strive to keep conflicts between motorists and
people walking and biking to a minimum, and
support active and inviting streets by reducing the
visual impact of service areas, parking, and
vehicular access.
STANDARDS
Harbor Square prioritizes dedicated pedestrian paths
with physical separation from parking areas.
This local example shows how inadequate design, where parking
areas and pedestrian paths are intermingled, can create conflicts
that hinder pedestrian movement.
24
STRENGTHEN PUBLIC SPACE
CONNECTIONS
a. Locate primary entrances along the
main street to contribute to the
character of the street.
b. Align public spaces, passages and
access with existing pedestrian paths
or desired lines where no formal paths
exist. Public-through routes in
Winslow are excellent examples of
pedestrian-scale connections.
c. Where appropriate, provide open
spaces adjacent to the sidewalk and
design public frontages to support
direct engagement with the street and
pedestrian activity.
d. Connect on-site pedestrian walkways
with existing public or private routes.
If property is within ¼ mile of a bus
stop or public park, provide convenient
pathways or entries to facilitate access
to these amenities for both residents
and the general public.
e. Limit the length of at-grade building
façade and walls without openings
(windows or doors) to 15 feet
Intent
Design for new development on Bainbridge Island should pay
careful attention to how the building will interact with the
public realm— street, sidewalk, open spaces and landscape.
Projects should look for opportunities to make stronger
connections in the Island’s network of public spaces
wherever possible.
P3
Lynwood Center uses the space between
buildings as both a pedestrian connection and as
a gathering space that has been used as an
outdoor stage for local events.
STANDARDS
25
FOSTER INTEREST AND ACTIVITY ALONG
COMMERCIAL STREETS
a. Locate utility areas away from active
spaces on commercial streets.
b. Buildings with street frontages in
neighborhood centers shall provide
weather protection along those
facades.
Intent
Bainbridge Island is fortunate to have strong and
active retail “main streets” in Winslow, Lynwood
and Rolling Bay. New development should
reinforce the scale and positive attributes of
these commercial streets with pedestrian-scale
interest and activities.
STANDARDS
P4
A mural connects the building to the street at
the Oliver in Winslow.
Weather protection and intentional stewardship of
public spaces ensures a comfortable pedestrian
experience on Madrone Lane.
26
B
Bainbridge Island’s
diverse buildings types
and architectural
styles work together
with the Island’s
unique natural setting
to create a beloved
character. New
development should
reinforce the character
of Bainbridge with
thoughtful, well-
designed, high quality
buildings.
Create varied facades at all
scales
Celebrate and prominently
feature sustainable design
Use high quality, sustainable
materials and well-crafted details
B2
B1
B3
BUILDING DESIGN STANDARDS
27
CREA T E VARIED FAC ADES AT ALL
SCALES
a. Electric service meters, air compressor units,
and other utility facilities shall be located to
be unobtrusive, and shall be screened if
visible from adjacent rights of way.
b. Street-facing facades shall be designed to
include a variety of materials, colors,
textures, and depths.
c. Interior and exterior project lighting shall
not spill out and be visible from adjacent
properties or rights of way.
B1
Intent
Buildings are expected to have a clear architectural
concept that is internally consistent, appropriate to
the building's site and functions, and elegantly
expressed.
STANDARDS
An office building on Hildebrand Lane in Bainbridge
Island uses detailing and alternation of two primary
materials to create a sense of texture and human scale.
28
CELEBRATE AND PROMINENTLY
FEATURE SUSTAINABLE DESIGN
a. Reuse existing structures whenever possible,
recognizing that the most sustainable
buildings are those that already exist.
b. Use building materials that are recycled,
renewable, or locally sourced.
c. Highlight regenerative materials and
renewable energy generation such as solar
panel or turbines as visible expressions of the
community's aesthetic and values.
d. Offer access to natural light and ventilation
in living and working spaces for comfort and
reduced energy consumption.
e. Manage direct sunlight with solar control and
shading devices, and integrate these features
into the overall design, with each façade
responding to solar orientation.
f. Consider green or living walls and/or roofs
with plants adapted to Bainbridge Island’s
microclimate; make them visible where
possible.
g. Design for flexibility so that the building can
be adapted in the future, including reuse of
structured parking for non-vehicular future
uses.
Intent
Projects in Bainbridge Island are expected to
be environmentally responsible and resource
efficient throughout their life cycle. Buildings
will need to meet the requirements of the City
and County that require sustainable design; the
Design Guidelines are intended to express the
values of a healthy environment in the design
expression of each project.
STANDARDS
B2
29
USE DURABLE QUALITY MATERIALS AND WELL -CRAFTED DETAILS
a. Choose durable, low-impact materials that
are appropriate for the climate and seasonal
shifts in weather conditions.
b. Select materials that are locally sourced and
supportive of Bainbridge Island's economy
where possible.
c. Materials used for architectural detailing
shall be selected to be proportional to
overall building massing.
Intent
Building materials should be selected for their
appropriateness to place, a minimal ecological
footprint, and long-term aesthetic value.
Thoughtful composition and detailing will express
a level of quality and a sense of scale inherent in
excellent architectural design.
STANDARDS
B3
The Parfitt Building demonstrates durable
materiality with detailing that complements the
massing.
30
LL ANDS C A P E STANDARDS
Landscape design
is expected to fit
the building into its
setting, contribute
to a comfortable and
welcoming pedestrian
environment, and
support natural
systems with
habitat-friendly and
sustainable features.
Integrate the landscape concept
to complement the architectural
concepts
Support the public realm with
landscape design
Integrate sustainable features
into the landscape and make
them visible wherever possible
Integrate and highlight green
infrastructure practices
Support healthy habitat in the
landscape
Preserve and enhance important
views and view corridors L6
L5
L4
L3
L2
L1
31
INTEGRATE THE LANDSCAPE CONCEPT TO COMPLEMENT THE ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPT
Intent
Landscape architecture and building architecture
are expected to be mutually complementary,
working together toward an overall design
that is functional, sustainable and pleasing. To
this end, the landscape should be designed in
tandem with the architecture, rather than as an
afterthought.
STANDARDS
a. Design the landscape to enhance elements
of the site and architectural concept by
strategies such as defining pathways, zones
and edges; creating focal points; softening
building massing; highlighting entries, and
adding scale, texture and interest to the site.
b. Locate deciduous trees to complement
passive solar strategies, providing shade in
summer and allowing sun in the winter.
c. Use plantings where privacy is needed for
more intimate and private spaces, or for
screening traffic and/or service uses.
d. Choose plantings that complement the
proportions and scale of the building and
offer color and interest throughout the year.
The Kitsap Regional Library Bainbridge Branch utilizes
landscape design to define walkways and create inviting
focal points such as this pond.
L1
Landscape features help screen service uses in this
multilayered planting at the Grow community.
32
SUPPORT THE PUBLIC REALM WITH THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN
a. Use landscape design to connect a network
of open spaces, appropriate to the project
context. This open space network could
include the streetscape and building
frontages, spaces between buildings, or
a series of planted areas and hardscape
intended for outdoor use.
b. Encourage interaction between the building’s
interior uses and exterior public space, by
utilizing plazas, seating areas and other
hardscape areas to support positive public
activities appropriate to the context and
building use.
Intent
Landscape design is expected to be an integral
part of public spaces, enhancing the functions,
activities and character of the public realm.
STANDARDS
Gateway Park provides accessible public space through
thoughtfully designed seating and other outdoor features.
L2
33
INTEGRATE SUSTAINABLE FEATURES
INTO THE LANDSCAPE AND MAKE THEM VISIBLE WHEREVER POSSIBLE
a. Prioritize native, climate-adapted, and
drought tolerant species.
b. Use plantings to provide shade and buffer
from wind exposure.
c. Locate trees to provide shading of paved
surfaces and reduce heat island effect
d. Use local, low impact, recycled, or
sustainably sourced materials. This rain garden at Bay Hay and Feed provides
sustainable stormwater management integrated into the
site.
Intent
Sustainable landscape design helps build a
network of productive ecosystems that promote
local biodiversity, water and energy conservation,
and provide a natural experience for the public in
the built environment. Human-made landscapes
in Bainbridge Island should strive to conserve
water and material resources, support healthy
and porous soils, and reduce the need for
fertilizers and pesticides that damage natural
ecosystems.
STANDARDS
This planted water garden at the Rowing Center
demonstrates sustainable plantings that provide for a
natural experience for the public.
L3
34
INTEGRATE AND HIGHLIGHT GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PRACTICES
a. Preserve or restore hydrological functions of
the natural landscape, improving stormwater
quality through sustainable landscape and
civil design practices including stormwater
retention and infiltration where appropriate.
b. Use green stormwater infrastructure (GSI)
strategies to reduce flooding by slowing and
reducing stormwater discharges.
Winslow Way stormwater treatment ensures
water quality and resilience to flooding within
the public right of way.
Intent
order protect water quality, relieve the burden on
stormwater infrastructure, and reduce water use
STANDARDS
L4
35
SUPPORT HEALTHY HABITAT IN THE LANDSCAPE
a. Preserve large trees and other significant
existing vegetation that contributes to larger
biological and ecological systems.
b. Design plantings to support stormwater
retention, infiltration and aquifer recharge.
c. Promote biodiversity though plantings that
are attractive to birds, pollinators and
other wildlife.
d. Prioritize low maintenance, drought resistant
native plantings.
Islandwood utilizes native vegetation and contextual
ecological habitat.
Intent
network of ecologically productive landscapes.
predators and inclement weather and mitigate
STANDARDS
forest and wetland that provide rich wildlife habitat and
L5
36
PRESERVE AND ENHANCE IMPORTANT VIEWS AND VIEW CORRIDORS
a. Prevent view blockage from the public realm,
using lower scale plantings where appropriate
and pruning existing trees with best practices
of limbing-up rather than topping.
Intent
water, mountains and forested areas are defining
STANDARD
L6
37
Introduction
Each public street in Bainbridge Island has
a distinct character that is defined by the
configuration of the right-of-way and the
building frontages, public and open spaces and
landscape that form the edges of each street.
This chapter focuses on improvements related to
new development or redevelopment that shape
the pedestrian realm and the buildings that
contribute to a distinct streetscape and together
reflect a desired future state for the street.
This chapter is intended to inform design
decisions on-site and in the public right-of-way
that contribute to the character
and experience of the streetscape. The street
types, frontages and guidelines described
in this chapter do not replace or supersede
the requirements of the “City of Bainbridge
Island Engineering Design and Construction
Standards and Specifications”.
STREET TYPES
1 State Route
2 Main Street
3 Neighborhood Main Street
4 Neighborhood Mixed Use
5 Mixed Use Arterial
6 Rural by Design
7 Green Street
8 Rural Green Street
Key streets on the island are categorized into
street types that are not defined by the same
conditions but share a similar vision and raise
similar design considerations (see Street Types
map on p46). Each street type defines common
characteristics and guidelines that offer design
direction and align with the vision for these
streets. The street types regulate building
orientation and façade design through specific
building frontage typologies that are permitted
only on certain street types. These building
frontages outline how buildings should relate to
each street and contribute to the public realm
through greenery, public spaces, and entries
consistent with the character of each street type.
FRONTAGE TYPES
Linear / Storefront
Landscape
Plaza
Forecourt
Stoop / Terrace
Vegetated Buffer
Parking
2
3
5
6
7
38
PAGE 46 // STREET TYPES & FRONTAGES010.5 MILES
S
T
A
T
E
H
W
Y
3
0
5
SP
O
R
T
S
M
A
N
C
L
U
B
R
D
WINSLOW WAY
POINT WHITE DR
L
Y
N
W
O
O
D
C
T
R
R
D
F
L
E
T
C
H
E
R
B
A
Y
R
D
HIGH SCHOOL RD
VALLEY RD
MIL
L
E
R
R
D
SU
N
R
I
S
E
D
R
MA
D
I
S
O
N
A
V
E
WYATT WAY
NE NEW BROOKLYN RD
NE DAY RD
PARFITT WAY OLYMPIC DR
FE
R
N
C
L
I
F
F
A
V
E
NE WING POINT WAY
MA
D
I
S
O
N
A
V
E
P
L
E
A
S
A
N
T
B
E
A
C
H
D
R
MAIN STREETNEIGHBORHOOD
STATE ROUTE
RURAL BY DESIGN
MIXED USENEIGHBORHOOD
MAIN STREET
MIXED USE ARTERIAL
This map shows the assigned
street types for sections of
Bainbridge Island’s major
thoroughfares. Design for new
streets as part of site plans or
subdivisions should follow the
guidelines for Green Streets or
Rural Green Streets types based
on their context. Development
on streets with no designated
frontage is governed by the
City's Municipal Code, Design
and Construction Standards.
Street Types
0 0.5
MILES
0.25
STATE ROUTE
RURAL BY DESIGN
MIXED USENEIGHBORHOOD
MAIN STREET
MIXED USE ARTERIAL
WINSLOW WAY
FE
R
N
C
L
I
F
F
A
V
E
PARFITT WAY
SR
3
0
5
OLYMPIC DROLYMPIC DR
MA
D
I
S
O
N
A
V
E
WYATT WAY
HIGH SCHOOL RD
WALLACE WAY
KNECHTEL WAY
ER
I
C
K
S
E
N
A
V
E
HI
L
D
E
B
R
A
N
D
L
N
NEW BROOKLYN RD
SP
O
R
T
S
M
A
N
C
L
U
B
R
D
BJUNE DR
39
OLYMPIC DR
TOWN CENTER &
NEARBY STREETS
WALLACE WAY
KNECHTEL WAY
PARFITT WAY
BJUNE DR
WINSLOW WAY
OLYMPIC DR
STATE ROUTE
MAIN STREET
NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE
RURAL BY DESIGN
MIXED USE ARTERIAL
0 0.25
0.5
MILES 40
NE DAY RD & SR 305
VALLEY RD
LYNWOOD CENTER
POINT WHITE DR
41
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Lane configuration per WSDOT
b. No pedestrians or activation at edge
c. Limited access
INTENT
a. Minimize direct access from private
property
b. Support off-road trail system
c. Restore native vegetation
d. Preserve and enhance Pacific
Northwest forested character
e. Conform with state signage laws
f. Minimize site disturbance
1 STATE ROUT E
42
2 MAIN STREET
CHARACTERISTICS
a. On-street parking
b. Wide sidewalks
c. Building to property line
d. Many glazed storefronts
e. Varied architectural style
f. Pedestrian through-routes
g. Fine-grained scale
INTENT
a. Encourage activation of street frontage
b. Encourage through-routes
c. Integrate landscape and public art
43
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Walkable neighborhood node
b. Sidewalk or other dedicated pedestrian
facilities
INTENT
a. Develop on-street parking
b. Activate the street with pedestrian
oriented street level uses such as
storefronts, restaurants, galleries etc.
c. Activate area between buildings and
right-of-way with seating, art, gardens
d. Encourage sidewalks or other high
quality pedestrian facilities
3 NEIGHBORHOOD MAIN STREET
44
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Lower traffic volume
b. Typically walkable/bikeable route to
access the downtown and ferry
c. Varied building frontage types
d. Generally landscaped edges
INTENT
a. Infill or add to pedestrian and bike
connections
b. Provide a landscaped setback to buffer
residential uses
c. Enhance the varied character
4 NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE
ER
I
C
K
S
E
N
AV
E
45
5 MIXED USE ARTERIAL
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Arterial level street capacity
b. Varied land uses
c. Varied edge conditions
INTENT
a. Provide landscaped setback to buffer
residential uses
b. Provide, curb, gutter, sidewalk bike lane
c. Minimize curb cuts
d. Create on-street parking where
appropriate
46
6 RURAL BY DESIGN
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Pedestrian shoulder or trail wherever
possible
b. Green edge conditions
c. Narrow travel lanes
INTENT
a. Retain green edge conditions and
character
b. Protect or create swale drainage
c. Retain pedestrian shoulder or trail
wherever possible
d. Maintain native vegetation
47
7 GREEN STREET
DESCRIPTION
The green street is intended to serve
as a model for interior streets as part
of subdivisions and larger commercial
developments in commercial, industrial,
mixed use and urban residential districts.
It is not a designation for existing public
streets but included to guide street design
as part of new development.
The examples on the following page show
the application of Green Street guidelines
for different types of roads, and accessways.
INTENT
a. Minimize impervious cover and consider
permeable paving
b. Integrate stormwater infiltration and
retention into landscaped areas
c. Use curb alternatives to channel runoff
into landscaping
d. Keep traffic speeds low with narrower
travel lanes.
e. Emphasize pedestrians and open space
as part of a shared space
f. Minimize paved area with shared
driveways, access and parking areas.
g. Use trees to transpire water and
mitigate heat island effects
48
EXAMPLE: SHARED STREET
EXAMPLE: SHARED ALLEY ACCESS
49
8 RURAL GREEN STREET
DESCRIPTION
The rural green street is intended to serve
as a model for interior streets as part of
subdivisions in non-urban residential
districts. It is not a designation for existing
public streets, but included to guide street
design as part of new development.
INTENT
a. Minimize impervious cover and consider
permeable paving
b. Create a soft edge along the street and
direct runoff into landscaped areas
c. Mitigate erosion along slopes and banks
with vegetation and permeable stone fill
d. Integrate stormwater infiltration and
retention into landscaping
e. Create a comfortable walking
environment with lower traffic speeds
f. Use trees to transpire water and
mitigate heat island effects
50
Building Frontages
Each street type is associated with a set of
building frontages that would be permitted along
streets of that type. Permitted frontage types for
designated street typology, and the setbacks for
each frontage type are shown in Table 1 below.
Each building frontage specifies an appropriate
setback that applies across all street types. On
designated streets these required setbacks will
supersede setback requirements contained in
the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code.
TABLE 1:
PERMITTED
FRONTAGES BY
STREET TYPE &
SETBACKS
L
I
N
E
A
R
/
ST
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
P
L
A
Z
A
F
O
R
E
C
O
U
R
T
S
T
O
O
P
/
TE
R
R
A
C
E
VE
G
E
T
A
T
E
D
BU
F
F
E
R
SETBACK BY
FRONTAGE 0 FT 10 FT -
20 FT
10 FT -
20 FT 0 FT 5 FT -
15 FT
25 FT -
50 FT
BUFFER
50
FT
UN
L
E
S
S
OT
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
AP
P
R
O
V
E
D
BY
DI
R
E
C
T
O
R
STATE ROUTE
MAIN STREET
NEIGHBORHOOD
MAIN STREET
NEIGHBORHOOD
MIXED-USE
MIXED -USE ARTERIAL
RURAL BY DESIGN
51
The linear or storefront building frontage has
no setback from the right-of-way. It is the
primary building frontage for pedestrian-
oriented retail streets and is appropriate
for active ground floor uses as part of non-
residential or mixed-used development.
SETBACK: 0 Feet
The landscape building frontage includes a
landscaped setback between the building
and the right-of-way This frontage type is
permitted on mixed-use and residential
streets and is appropriate for office and
residential uses particularly when on the
ground floor.
SETBACK: 10 - 20 Feet
1
LANDSCAPE 2
52
The plaza building frontage includes
a pedestrian-oriented public space in
the setback between the building and
the right-of-way. This frontage type is
permitted on retail and mixed-use streets
and is appropriate for active uses such as
retail, dining or civic and cultural uses. The
plaza must contribute to and welcoming
streetscape, and should support human
activity, with amenities such as seating,
outdoor dining and activation.
SETBACK: 10 - 20 Feet
The forecourt building frontage has a defined
open or public space at the entrance along
the right-of-way. This frontage type is
permitted along retail and mixed-use streets
and is appropriate for a wide range of land
uses and mixed-use development.
SETBACK: 0 Feet
COURTYARD: 10 - 30 Feet Depth
10 - 30 Feet Width
Must contain primary building
entrances and open onto the
primary public street
FORECOURT 4
PLAZA 3
53
The stoop / terrace building frontage
includes a landscaped setback from the right-
of-way that accommodates a porch, stoop
or terrace at the building’s primary entrance.
This frontage type is permitted on mixed-use
and residential streets and is appropriate for
residential and non-retail commercial uses.
SETBACK: 5 - 15 Feet
The vegetated buffer building frontage uses
a deep setback to screen development from
the right-of-way. This is the only frontage type
permitted on SR 305, where access is limited,
and it also appropriate for light industrial and
inactive non-residential uses on Rural by
Design streets. Vegetated buffers can be either
natural, where vegetation has arisen naturally or
deliberately landscaped to provide an effective
screen where there is little natural context.
BUFFER: 50 Feet along SR 305
NATURAL: Preserve or restore native vegetation
consistent with conditions and species
nearby.
LANDSCAPE: Create a landscaped screen with trees
and understory plantings that are native
or drought tolerant and compatible with
the local microclimate.
BUFFER 6
5
54
The parking frontage is the only frontage
type with parking along the right-of-way. This
frontage type is permitted only as an interim
condition, where other frontages may be
infeasible with parking requirements where a
departure may be necessary. A landscaped
area with trees and understory plantings is
required between the right -of-way and the
parking area.
SETBACK: 10 Feet Minimum
PARKING
55
Introduction
The supplemental standards in this chapter are
intended to address specific conditions of the
site and surrounding context that require
additional design guidance to ensure
compatibility of new development. These
conditions include larger sites (over 1 acre in size),
historic places, and civic uses that each present
unique design challenges and opportunities. New
development and redevelopment that include
these specific conditions are required to conform
to the Design Standards in this chapter in
addition to those outlined earlier in this
document.
SUPPLEMENTAL
STANDARDS + GUIDELINES
56
Larger Sites
Intent: To develop larger sites (over 1 acre) to fit within the surrounding
context and reinforce desired patterns of development including street
typologies, frontage types, and minimizing the visual and physical impact of
parking on the public realm.
STANDARD
a. Use landscaping to buffer and minimize the
visual impact of parking.
b. Locate parking under the building.
c. Provide on-street parking on public streets.
d. Provide a series of smaller groupings of
parking to minimize the visual and functional
impacts.
STANDARDS
a. Design the site so buildings front on a public
street.
b. Design the site with buildings fronting on a
public space with a variety of activities and
functions.
c. Design the site with buildings fronting on
public or semi-public open space with
human-scaled design elements.
Design sites to minimize the visual impact of parking on the public realm 1
Design the site by clustering buildings and
public spaces, or open space 2
57
Historic Places
Intent: To ensure that new and infill development are compatible with historic
areas, sites, and buildings on the Island. Historic properties are those with
structures that are 50 years or older and would be eligible for the national, state
or local register of historic places, or sites that are listed on those registers.
STANDARDS
a. Design sites and buildings in historic areas to
meet the Secretary of the Interior's standards for
modifications to existing historic buildings and infill
development.
b. Design buildings to be consistent with the scale of
nearby historic buildings or districts based on the
context analysis.
c. Consider historic landscaping that contributes to
the context of historic buildings.
STANDARDS
a. Minimize alterations to historic buildings and
properties that are inconsistent with the original
design of the building.
b. Restore buildings to their original historic
design elements when previously altered.
Design the site, building(s), and landscape to be compatible with historic buildings without 1
Maintain the historic integrity of buildings over 50 years old listed or eligible for the national or local register of historic places. 2
58
Civic Uses
Intent: The design of civic uses and public spaces should be prominent,
highlight their unique role in the community and reflect local values and
civic identity. Civic projects should maximize opportunities for public
benefits through integrated design.
STANDARD
a. Civic uses may use unique frontage types to
highlight uses, and public amenities with larger
open spaces, gardens, art and other elements
between the street and the building.
b. Integrate public open space in the design
of civic sites including plazas, parks, seating
areas, natural areas, and other amenities.
place to interact with parts of the Island's history.
2
1
Design civic sites and buildings to serve multiple functions such as public space, community gatherings, public art, and other compatible uses.
59
Photo Credits
Photographer or firm listed by page and position.
PAGE: Section POSITION: Source POSITION: Source
COVER Coates Design Architects
Design on Bainbridge
PG 1: Design on Bainbridge WikiMedia Commons
PG 2: Design on Bainbridge Framework
PG 3: Values and Principles Framework
Context Analysis
PG 13: Context Analysis The Island Gateway
Site Design
PG 18: Site Design APsystems Solar / A+R Solar
PG 19: Site Design - S1 TOP: Berger Partnership BOTTOM: Berger Partnership
PG 20: Site Design - S2 TOP: Seattle Public Utilities BOTTOM: PWL Partnership
PG 21: Site Design - S3 TOP: Wenzlau Architects BOTTOM: Framework
PG 22: Site Design - S4 TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
PG 23: Site Design - S5 TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
PG 24: Site Design - S6 TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
Public Realm
PG 25: Public Realm Framework
PG 26: Public Realm - P1 TOP: Camelia Apartments BOTTOM: Southern Living
PG 27: Public Realm - P2 TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Flatrock Productions
PG 28: Public Realm - P3 TOP: Berger Partnership BOTTOM:: Curbed Los Angeles
PG 29: Public Realm - P4 TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
PG 30: Public Realm - P5 TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
PG 31: Public Realm - P6 TOP: Building Salt Lake BOTTOM: Framework
60
PAGE: Section POSITION: Source POSITION: Source
Building Design
PG 32: Building Design CTA Design Builders Inc.
PG 33: Building Design - B1 TOP: Coates Design Architects BOTTOM: Framework
PG 34: Building Design - B2 TOP: Wenzlau Architects BOTTOM: Culter Anderson
Architects
PG 35: Building Design - B3 TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
PG 36: Building Design - B4 TOP: Kriegh Architects BOTTOM: Framework
PG 37: Building Design - B5 TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Johnston Architects
Landscape
PG 38: Landscape Berger Partnership
PG 39: Landscape - L1 TOP: Berger Partnership BOTTOM: Miller Company
Landscape Architects
PG 40: Landscape - L2 TOP: Uptown Normal BOTTOM: Framework
PG 41: Landscape - L3 TOP: SvR Design Company BOTTOM: Berger Partnership
PG 42: Landscape - L4 TOP: Berger Partnership BOTTOM: Berger Partnership
PG 43: Landscape - L5 TOP: Bainbridge Island Parks &
Recreation
BOTTOM: Berger Partnership
PG 44: Landscape - L6 TOP: Walker Macy BOTTOM: Framework
61
PAGE: Section POSITION: Source POSITION: Source
Street & Frontage Types
PG 46: Street Types Framework
PG 47: Street Types Framework
PG 48: Street Types TOP LEFT: Framework TOP RIGHT: Framework
PG 48: Street Types BOTTOM LEFT: Framework BOTTOM RIGHT: Framework
PG 49: Street Types - 1 Google, 2019
PG 50: Street Types - 2 Google, 2019
PG 51: Street Types - 3 Google, 2019
PG 52: Street Types - 4 Google, 2019
PG 53: Street Types - 5 Google, 2019
PG 54: Street Types - 6 Google, 2019
PG 55: Street Types - 7 Kevin Robert Perry, Urban Rain Design
PG 56: Street Types - 7 TOP: Google, 2019 BOTTOM: City of Auckland, NZ
PG 57: Street Types - 8 Framework
PG 59: Building Frontages TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
PG 60: Building Frontages TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
PG 61: Building Frontages TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
PG 62: Building Frontages Framework
Subdivision Guidelines
PG 63: Subdivision Guidelines Google, 2019
Supplemental Guidelines
PG 67: Supplemental Guidelines Google, 2019
PG 68: Supplemental Guidelines TOP: Hewitt Architects BOTTOM: Hewitt Architects
PG 69: Supplemental Guidelines TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Jennifer Pells
PG 70: Supplemental Guidelines TOP: Framework BOTTOM: Framework
62
Appendix
Documents Required for Design Review
Presentation Requirements at DRB Meeting
Acknowledgements for 2021 D4B
C
B
A
63
Naming Convention: All submittals shall be named “DRB_SubmittalTitle_ProjectName”
A APPENDIX
DOCUMENTS REQUIRED FOR DESIGN REVIEW
1. Written Project Overview
• Project name and description
• Zoning requirements summary
including number of units and parking
stalls
2. Context Analysis Drawing
• Property lines
• Topography including contours
• Physical and natural features on
site including critical areas per
BIMC 16.20, prevailing wind,
tidal inundation
• Trees
• Surrounding properties’ uses,
zoning, and structures
• Unique and prominent features
including views
• Known wildlife habitat
• Streets, nearby active
transportation facilities, and
existing formal / informal trails
3. Site Plan
• Label streets and property lines
• Show roadways, parking areas,
pedestrian and vehicular
circulation
• Label square footage for
commercial/residential space
4. Landscape Plan
• All streetscape and landscape
elements
5. Written Architectural Narrative
• Define a clear design narrative
that guides all aspects of the
project, including aesthetics,
materials, and form.
• Explain how the project is
sustainable as defined on page
11
• Explain how the following were
informed by the context
analysis and design narrative:
• Building form
• Site design
• Façade design choices and
detailing
• Materials and landscaping
• Requested Departures
• Include rationale for
request
• Anticipated community or
project benefits
6. Site Section Drawings
• Minimum of two site sections (both
longitudinal and transverse)
extending to adjacent buildings
within 100 feet of the property line
• Show preliminary floor to floor
heights and overall height
7. Building Elevation Drawings
• Elevations of each structure (all
sides) and of adjacent
structures at same scale.
8. Rendering Drawings
• At least one eye level
perspective from major street
location.
• At least one 3-dimensional
rendering of entire project
9. Exterior Lighting Plan
• final location of exterior lights
and indication of light spillage
at night
10. Materials Palette
• Color and materials board with
reference to drawings
• Landscape color and materials
board
64
Naming Convention: All submittals shall be named “DRB_SubmittalTitle_ProjectName”
B APPENDIX
PRESENTATION REQUIREMENTS AT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
Presentation Objectives
• Present Design Vision: Clearly articulate the architectural narrative and goals of the project,
including how the design aligns with community values and needs.
• Showcase Key Features: Highlight relevant aspects of the design such as unique architectural
elements, sustainable practices, and functional spaces.
• Demonstrate Compliance: Provide evidence that the design meets municipal code, building
codes, and other regulatory requirements.
• Visual Representation: Use submitted visuals to effectively convey design intent and context.
• Address Community Impact: Discuss how the project will affect the community, including
economic, social, and environmental considerations.
• Outline Next Steps: Clearly define the project's timeline and immediate next steps post-review,
setting expectations for further review by staff.
Presentation Parameters
• Presentations should take approximately 30 minutes.
• Afterward, the Design Review Board will facilitate a discussion that encourages feedback from
board members. Applicants are expected to hear and discuss concerns and suggestions.
65
C APPENDIX
2021 VERSION ACKNOLWEDGEMENTS
66