RES 99-37 PILOT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT
City Council Meeting, December J 5, 1999
RESOLUTION NO. 99-37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, 'w ASHINGTO~, APPROVING THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A PILOT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
PROGRAM.
-WHEREAS, Framework Goal 7 of the " City ofB.ainbridge Island Comprehensive Plan
calls for the development ofa meaningful process for citizen participation; and
.W1IEREAS, the Community Relations Committee of the City Council convened a public
participation committee composed of citizens, developers and, City staff to study the idea
of a public participation program; and
WHEREAS~ the public parti~ipation committee have proposed a public participation
program (as shown in Attachment 1 to this resolution) that would occur early in the
development process in order to inform citizens of projects in their neighborhood, and to
'provide the development community with an awareness of public concerns; and
WHEREAS, the City Co.uncil has determined that a public participation program could
result in improved communications, better development projects, and a smoother
approval process, and .
WHEREAS, the City Council has further dete111l:ined that it is in the best interests of the .
citizens of the City to establish 'a pilot program which would allow all participants to
assess the effectiveness of the proposed public participation program;
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAINBRIDGE
IS'LAND, WASHINGTON, AS FOLLOWS: '
Section 1: The City Council of the City of Bainbridge Islan~, Washington, approves
the '.establishment of a voluntary pilot public participation program to begin no later than
February 1, .2000, and requests that the Community Relations Committee work with City
_ staff and representatives of the public participation committee to implement the pilot
pro gram.
Section 2: The City will evaluate the pi~ot participation program after.a s.ix-month period. This
review will commence on approximately August 1, 2000. Upon completion of the review, the City Council
will determine whether to establi~h a permanent public participation pro~ram.
Section 3: Ifno applicant for a development project volunteers to participate in the pilot program
during the first six months, the program will be extended for another six months, with a review
com~encing thereafter.
PASSED BY the City Council this 22nd day ofDe~ember, 1999.
APPROVED by the Mayor this 27th day of December, 1999.
A TTESTI AUTHENTICATE:
L. (?~~
!SUSAN P. KASPER, City C16rk
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: December 10,1999
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: December 22,1999
RESOLUTION NO. 99..37
~; -~. :
~ :': .
f .
City of Bainbridge Island
. PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TO:
City Council
FROM:
Kathy Cook
DATE:
RE:
December 15, 1999
COUNCIL MEETIN'G ON DECEMBE~ 15, 1999-RESOLUTION 99-37, .
ESTABLISHING A PILOT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM
The City C.ouncil is scheduled to consider Resolution 99-~,7 at tonight's Council Meeting~ A copy of
Resolution 99-37 was sent to. you last week, along with a proposal for a pilot public participation..
program~ '
Since that packet was sent to you, the Current Planning staffhas raised some concerns about the language
on p3ge 2 of the proposal. The original language states that' staff will be available at public participation
meetings to answer. speciflc questions about development regulations, SEP A, etc. .Staff'was 'conc~med
that this could be interpreted to. mean that planning staff would give instant, binding decisions and
interpretations on complex code requirements.
Therefore, staff is p'roposiitg the new language shown on page 2 of the proposal.
Thank yo~~
For Council Meeting, December 15, /999
PROPOSAL FOR A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROGRAM
Introduction
Public participation early in the development process informs citizens of projects in their
neighborhood, and provides the opportunity for them to express their views~. It gives the
developer an awareness of public concerns, and the opportunity to design a project that addresses
those concerns. Recent developm~nt projects on Bainbridge Island h~ve confirmed that good
communication between the developer, the neighborhood and the City early in the process can
lead to more harmonious relations, a better deve19pment project and a smoother approval process.
Providing the opportunity for public participation is especially important now, as Bainbridge
Island experiences a marked increase in development. Therefore, the Community Relations
" Committee of the City Council convened a group of citizens, developers and staff to explore the
idea of a public participation program. The public participation committee looked at examples of
similar programs in other communities, and drew upon their own understanding of Bainbridge
Island with the goal of developing a program that would benefit the developer, the neighborhood
and the City. .
Guidin!! Principles
The public participation committee started by considering what a public participation program
should achieve. The group agreed that the program should work toward the following goals and
benefits :
. The program should provide the public with accurate and timely information about
. development projects that may affect their neighborhood~
. ~e program should provide the opportunity for early, effective and informed public
participation regarding development applications. This will allow the neighborhood to
identify issues that concern them,. and allow the developer the opportunity to understand and
ifpossible, seek ways to address the concerns of the neighborhood. "
. The program should be designed to be of mutual benefit to the neighborhood, the developer
and the City. Residents receive the benefit of having more input on issues that will affect their
neighborhood. By addressing these issues early in the development process, the developer
receives the benefit of fewer problems and delays later in the process. The City benefits
because identifying issues and resolving them ifpossible could reduce the amount of time
required of the Planning Commission, City Council and/or Hearing Examiner~
. The program should provide educational opportunities for the public to learn about City
development regulations and thei.f relationship to the Comprehensive Plan~ A public
participation program will be effective only if the public has a clear understanding of the
major features. of the Comprehensive Plan, what is allowed by code, and what is'
discretionary ~
. . The program should improve communication between the development community, citizens,
City staff and elected officials. This will help defuse potentially adyersarial relationships,
and increase trust. It will also help City staff and officials keep abreast of existing and
emerging community concems~
. The program should be kept as simple and clear as possible, and easily accessible to both the
developer snd the public. The program. should have a definite time period and should not
delay the development process.
In considering the purpose of the public participation program, the committee also discussed what
the program is not intended to do. The expectation is not that the public participation program
.r I .~~ I. r~~.. ~
Por Council Meeting, December 15, 1999
will produce complete consensus on all applications, but that it will encourage applicants to be
good neighbors and allow for informed decision making. . The program is not intended to create
another approval process.. The program is not intended to simulate a pre-application conference,
in which the technical details of a proposed project are reviewed. Meetings between the developer
and the neighborhood are .not "hearings," but discussions to identify any issues that need to be
resolved.. Any modifications which the developer might make to his project would be voluntary,
not required..
Format
The public participation program would, typically consist of one meeting between the developer
and the neighborhood, early in the development application process. A trained facilitator would
be available to establish the ground rules and guide the meeting.
Depending on the specifics of the development project, the applicant could choose to hold the
meeting shortly before or after the pre-application conference. Ifpossible, meetings would be
held in an appropriate facility in the vicinity of the proposed project
The developer and the City would work together to schedule the meeting with the neighborhood.
Noticing.should include:
. Property owners within the public hearing notice area.as specified by code requirements.
. Any homeowner's association in the immediate vicinity.
. The Planning Department's mailing list of Island cOffi.ffiunity associations.
. Listing on the City web site.
.At the meeting, the developer would make a brief presentation on the proposed project.. 'This
presentation wo~ld be conceptual in nature, rather than technical. Community members could
then ask questions, identify areas of conce~ and work with the developer on alternative
approaches. As stated earlier, the purpose of the meeting is to define and discuss the issues. No
vote would be taken, nor would any fo~al recommendation be made.
City .staff ".'f,ttluld attend the meetings te serve as Q resouroe on ,Comprehensive 'Plan policies, code
"requirements, ,SEP~^.. Rna ethor issues~ City staff would attend the. meetings to answer questions
about the development application nrocess. Starr-could also orovide g:eneral infortnation about
City o.olicies and regulations~ with the express understandin~ that any ooinions given would not
be binding. It mu~t be clear that staff would not be attending the meetin~ in a decision-makinl!
role. The comolexity of many .code ref!Ulations makes ifimpossible to orovide an instant .
interpretation. Additionally.. applications are often modifie.d durin2 the develonment.nrocess.. or
codes may be chan~ed.. '
Upon completion of the meeting, a brief written report would be prepared. The report would
include the dates and location of the neighborhood meetings, who was invited to the meeting, and
pow many people attended. The report would summarize the issues and concerns that were
expressed at the meeting, and whether any resolution was reached. This report would be
submitted to the Planning Department and attached to the staff report which goes to the 'Planning
Commission, Hearing Examiner and/or City Council. It is expected that the staffreport and any
recommendation by the Planning Commission and/or Hearing Examirier would also include a '
discussion of the issues raised at the public participation meeting. The format for the report is
.attached.
2
. +
t'
For Council Meeting, December 15,1999
Establishing a Pilot Proe:ram \
The.Community.Relations Committee recommends testing the public participation program on a
pilot basis. This will allow all of the participants to identify which components of the proposed
program work and which' need to be adjusted. The pilot program would begin in early 2000, and
would last a minimum of six months. During this time, the proposed public participation
program would be applied on a voluntary basis to several development projects, such as
subdivisions or site plan reviews. At.the end of six months, the City Will evaluate the pilot
program, and "decide whether to establish a permanent, mandatory public participation program.
Because participation in the pilot program is voluntary, there is the possibility that no developers
will step forward within the first six month period. In that case, the pilot program should be
extended for another six months. .
, When Should the PubUc Participation Pr.oeram be Used.
The Committee suggested that the following land use applications should be considered for the
public participation" .program, with the understanding that the list could be modified with,the
benefit of experience: .
. Subdivisions'
. Shoreline CUPs
. Site plan reviews. for larger projects.
3