HEX DECISIONFebruary 13, 2017
CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WASHINGTON
HEARING EXAMINER
REPORT AND DECISION
Project: Montessori Country School
Conditional Use Permit / Site Plan and Design Review
File Number: PLN 17677 CUP/ SPR
Applicant: Montessori Country School
10994 Arrow Point Drive NE
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
Location: 10994 Arrow Point Drive NE
Request: Increase campus student population from 83 to 146 and staff from 10 to 18.
Construct six new buildings (in addition to the existing building), expanding
floor area from 3,550 square feet to 11,853 square feet. Modify existing parking
lot and access drive dimensions.
SPPA Review: A Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance was issued on December 21,
2016.
Zoning and Plan R -1, Residential zone, one unit per acre
Designations: OSR -I, Open Space Residential, one unit per acre
FINDINGS OF FACT
Site Characteristics
Tax Assessor Inibrmation:
a. Tax Lot Number: 172502-1-087-2000
b. Owner of record: Montessori Country School
C. Lot size: 4.38 acres
d. Land use: Community and Educational / Educational Facility
2.
Background: The Montessori Country
School is a non -profit private school that is
currently
located
on two campuses. The school requests
approval to
expand its Arrow Point Drive campus in
order to serve the entire student population on
a single site.
In 1990 the school revised an
existing
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 1
Kitsap County Unclassified Use Permit, receiving approval for two preschool sessions per weekday at
a maximum of 34 students per session plus an elementary program at a maximum of 30 students (98
students total).
3. Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designation: The subject property is within the R -1 district
and the Open Space Residential (OSR -1) designation. The properties to the north and east are similarly
designated. Properties to the west, across Arrow Point Drive, and to the south are zoned R -0.4 with a
Comprehensive Plan designation of OSR -0.4.
4. Existing Development: The property contains a private school campus with a school building
and associated development, including a parking lot and playground. The property to the north is
undeveloped. The property to the east contains single - family residential development. The property to
the west is a public park (Battle Point Park). Both properties to the south contain single - family
residential development.
Access: Vehicular access is provided from Arrow Point Drive via a one -way loop.
6. Soils and Terrain: Site soils are composed of ice - contact deposits overlying Vashon till. The
existing school building, parking lot and playground are located in the southwestern portion of the site
and the existing septic system is located further east within the southern portion. The remainder of the
site is heavily wooded with second growth forest.
The topography of the western third of the site is relatively flat. The remainder of the parcel
slopes west to east with inclinations ranging from 10 to 40 percent. A small area in the middle of the
site contains a slope that exceeds 40 percent but has no individual section greater than ten feet in
height. The geotechnical reconnaissance indicates that this slope is relatively stable, with no
groundwater seepage observed and no adverse geologic strata sequencing evident. The geotechnical
engineer concluded that no regulated geologically hazardous areas are present on the property.
Public Services and Utilities:
a. Police: City of Bainbridge Island Police Department.
b. Fire: Bainbridge Island Fire District.
c. Water: On -site well.
d. Sewer / Septic: On -site septic system.
e. Storm drainage: On -site dispersion is proposed for the parcel's eastern basin and
on -site detention for the western basin.
Procedural History
8. A pre- application conference was held on October 20, 2015, with a public participation meeting
convened on January 4, 2016. Applications for Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit were
received on June 15, 2016, and deemed complete on July 5, 2016. Public meetings were also held
before the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission.
9. The project is subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review. Utilizing the optional
DNS process provided in WAC 197 -11 -355, the City issued a combined Notice of Application /SEPA
comment period on July 15, 2016. The 14 -day comment period ended on July 29, 2016, 'rile City,
acting as lead agency, issued a SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) for this
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 2
proposal on December 21, 2016. The SEPA appeal period expired on January 4, 2017, with no appeals
having been filed.
10. Regarding agency comments, the Kitsap Public Health District has approved the application,
with subsequent building permits also subject to Health District approval. The Bainbridge Island Fire
District has approved the project as conditioned. Both the Design Review Board and the Planning
Commission reviewed the proposal. At a public meeting on January 12, 2017, the Planning
Commission unanimously recommended approval subject to modified conditions regarding
construction fencing and to incorporate septic drainfields into a covenant protecting forested areas
associated with stormwater requirements.
11. Two public comments were received prior to the public hearing. One commenter requested
assurances that the well, septic and stormwater facilities will be adequate to serve the project. A second
neighbor to the south, who also spoke at the public hearing, expressed concern over increased risks to
groundwater and aquifers and whether noise levels from the children's play area would interfere with
telephone conversations held in her home office.
12. BIMC 2.16.170 allows an applicant for a single project proposal requiring more than one major
City land use application to request them all to be processed together within a consolidated project
review. A consolidated public hearing on the Montessori Country School applications for Site Plan and
Design Review and Conditional Use Permit approvals was held by the City's Hearing Examiner on
February 1, 2017.
Comprehensive Plan Consistency
13. The staff report documents project consistency with the Land Use, Economic and Cultural
Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Promoting economic diversity and the non- profit sector are
favored goals under the Economic Element. The school's emphasis on arts education and inclusion of
the natural environment into the program support Cultural Element goals.
Regulatory Compliance
14. Educational facilities are listed as conditionally permitted in the R -1 district under the BIMC
18.09.020 Use Table, to be processed as major conditional uses in residential zones (BIMC 18.09.030).
Kitsap County granted an Unclassified Use Permit to the Montessori Country School in 1990 to serve
preschool and elementary -age children. .
15. Under BIMC 18.12.020 -2 the maximum allowable coverage for residential lots in the R -1
district is 15 percent, with institutions not to exceed 50 percent of the allowable lot coverage (i.e. 7.5
percent). The parcel is 4.38 acres in size and proposed lot coverage is 13,660 square feet, or 7.1
percent of the lot area, therefore meeting this requirement. A small portion of the existing building
encroaches three feet into the ten -foot side setback now required along the south property line. All
other existing or proposed structures to be located within the setbacks, such as fencing and walkways,
are authorized as setback modifications under BIMC Table 18.12.040. All proposed new buildings will
lie outside required setbacks.
16. Pursuant to BIMC 18.15.010, a 25 foot wide full screen buffer is required along the perimeter of
a non - residential use located within a residential district, which buffer may be reduced via averaging to
accommodate a unique situation so long as a minimum ten foot width is maintained. The 25 foot wide
partial screen required along rights -of -way also may be averaged. The site must provide at least 40 tree
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 3
units per acre following redevelopment, with trees within required landscape buffers not counting
toward the tree unit total.
17. The perimeter buffer is proposed to be averaged, as permitted by code. Buffer widths along the
northwest and southwest will be reduced in three locations to 15 feet, resulting in a total reduction of
7,650 square feet. As compensation, buffer widths will be increased along the northeast, southeast and
east property boundaries to provide a contiguous 35 foot width boundary, providing a total increase of
8,700 square feet. The project is conditioned to maintain the buffers for the life of the project. The
development is mandated to provide 177 total tree units (40 X 4.42 acres) to meet the tree retention
requirements of BIMC Chapter 18.15. The tree retention schedule specifies that the project will
provide 199 tree units. Parking lot landscaping will also be required.
18. During construction the applicant must also identify areas of prohibited disturbance, generally
corresponding to the driplines or critical root zones of the existing vegetation to be retained, plus future
rain gardens and larger planting areas. Temporary fencing must be installed and posted with signage
denoting the vegetation protection area. No impervious surfaces, fill, excavation, vehicle operations,
compaction, removal of native soil or storage of construction materials are to be allowed within any
protected area defined by construction fencing.
19. BIMC 18.15.020 requires an elementary school to provide one parking space per 50 students
plus one space per employee. The proposed development will serve 146 students and 18 staff,
resulting in a parking requirement of 21 spaces. The proposed parking lot will supply 26 spaces,
including one handicapped - accessible parking space. Additionally, to accommodate all- school events
the applicant has a long- standing agreement with the Parks District to use the parking facilities at Battle
Point Park across Arrow Point Drive for overflow.
20. The project will provide pedestrian access from Arrow Point Drive through the parking lot plus
a second pedestrian access from the parking lot alone, both connecting to the internal sidewalk that
fronts the buildings. A dedicated drop -off / pick -up lane will allow students to exit directly onto the
internal sidewalk, avoiding interaction between students and vehicles in the parking lot. Walkways and
decks will create pedestrian connectivity between buildings. The project conditions mandate
appropriate curbs, walkway dimensions and surfacing meeting the requirements of BIMC 18.15.030,
as approved by the City Engineer. A bicycle rack is proposed for the southeast side of the parking lot,
with the project conditioned to provide at least six bicycle spaces.
21. All outdoor lighting must result in no light trespass, as defined by BIMC 18.15.040. Outdoor
lighting is proposed on buildings and along walkways. The project is conditioned to demonstrate
compliance with lighting regulations at the time of building permit application.
22. The project is subject to the General and Commercial and Mixed Use Design Guidelines stated
at BIMC Chapter 18.18. The Design Review Board reviewed the proposal and unanimously
recommended approval. The proposed site redevelopment will provide a 25 -foot width vegetated
buffer along Arrow Point Drive, with the parking lot lying between the buffer and the buildings, all of
which will be set back at least 80 feet from the right -of -way. Parking facilities will provide an
appropriate separation between vehicular traffic and the campus. Parking spaces will be grouped into
clusters interspersed with landscape areas.
23. Ih addition to sidewalks, the development will include other outdoor spaces such as
playgrounds, play fields and trails. Most will be located behind the buildings in order to efficiently
serve the student population, with one courtyard sited prominently in front to create a terminus for the
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 4
pedestrian walkway connection to Arrow Point Drive.
24. Buildings designs are encouraged to utilize features such as massing, materials, windows,
canopies, and pitched or terraced roof forms to create a visually distinct base and cap. Variations in
texture and elevations help to avoid massive scales. The architect's stated goal is to create a campus
that manifests environmentally aware building practices and design. Buildings will be oriented to
capture natural light and provide views of the outdoors. Building materials include natural wood
siding, corrugated metal, cement board, recycled wood trim and decking, and reclaimed timber. All
buildings will be single story with no blank walls. Covered walkways, porches and canopies will
afford protection from the elements. No rooftop mechanical equipment is proposed.
Neighborhood Impacts
25. The City's Development Engineer has concluded that, as conditioned, the project can meet
applicable stormwater requirements without causing either undue burdens on the affected drainage
systems or interference with the use and enjoyment of properties downstream. The site is divided into
eastern and western basins. The western basin outlets to a swale along Arrow Point Road, then flows
are conveyed beneath the road to a seasonal pond in Battle Point Park and eventually discharged to
Fletcher Bay. This conveyance system has potential capacity and maintenance problems at a number of
points but appears to function adequately. The applicant proposes to detain stormwater onsite and
release it at flow rates that match predevelopment peaks, thereby not increasing downstream impacts.
26. As originally proposed, stormwater within the eastern basin was to be directed to an off -site
stormwater pond and then to an outfall at Manzanita Bay. But staff determined that the proposed
release to Manzanita Bay would be prohibited by the Shoreline Master Program and requested the
applicant to revise the stormwater plan for the eastern basin. The new proposal is to disperse
stormwater onsite via four 50 foot long dispersion pipes located on the wooded eastern side of the
property.
27. The onsite portion of eastern basin presents a number of challenges. It is mostly forested, with
slopes in the 8 to 20 percent range. The slopes are underlain by impermeable glacial till at relatively
shallow depths, making the site a poor candidate for either infiltration or dispersion trenching. The
four dispersion pipes proposed to be laid on the ground surface represent the maximum number
feasible on the site and are modeled to be able to handle 14,000 square feet of roof runoff. That
appears to leave 300 square feet of impervious surface flows unaccounted for, as well as 2000 square
feet of landscaping. The nearest residence downslope to the east is over 100 feet away from the
proposed dispersion pipe array and is partially protected by an upslope curtain drain at the project site
boundary.
28. The project engineer's proposed solution to the pipe capacity shortfall includes detaining flows
above the 14,000 square foot limit to meter a slower release rate plus installing a second curtain drain
upslope from the septic drainfield. This approach could well prove to be adequate but offers no margin
of safety. The City Development Engineer has also expressed concerns about the available forested
cover being adequate to meet dispersion requirements. A condition has been added to the approval (no.
6.1) to create a five -year stormwater system monitoring plan to verify the system's adequacy in actual
practice.
29. Arrow and Battle Points are relatively isolated locations and traffic volumes of the roads
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 5
serving the site are generally light. The school staggers its morning student dropoff times to avoid
creating congestion either on the site itself or in its environs. As noted, reserve parking is available
across the street at Battle Point Park; the school's usage of the park facility does not overlap heavy
recreational periods. A certificate of traffic concurrency has been issued for the proposal.
30. Since 2015 Denise McDonnell has been the school's neighbor adjacent to the south. She both
commented on the application and offered testimony at the public hearing. She operates a virtual office
in her home and is concerned that noise from the existing playground near the site's southern boundary
will increase after school expansion and interfere with her business conversations. The staff report
discussed this concern, from which the following descriptive observations were selected:
The commenters' residence was constructed in 2015. The existing play area on the subject
property is 170 feet from the commenters' residence. No change to the play area or playground
equipment is proposed within 270 feet of the residence; the proposed development adds two
play fields beyond that distance.
... Additionally, there is a vegetated swath 55 feet in width between the play area and the
commenters' property, and an additional 25 foot width vegetation buffer on the commenters'
property.
Noise levels exceeding 70 decibels are loud enough to be considered annoying, intrusive, and
interfere with telephone use. By comparison, the sound of a dishwasher is 80 dba at a distance
of 16 feet; 70 dba is the sound emanating from a freeway at a distance of 50 feet. Noise levels
of children on playgrounds can approach 115 dba, equivalent to the level of noise experienced
standing three feet from a power mower.
Decibel levels are reduced by approximately 6 dba for every doubling of the distance from the
noise source.... The exterior walls of a home typically provide noise level reduction of 25 — 30
dba...
31. When at the public hearing the Examiner expressed skepticism that the noise levels of children
playing could "approach 115 dba ", staff made reference to a World Health Organization training slide
presentation, Children and Noise, as authority for the statement. Staff has submitted a print -out of the
slide show to the record. In addition, the Examiner has taken notice of noise documentation literature
readily accessible on the internet. The City regulates noise under BIMC Chapter 16.16, which largely
tracks the state regulatory scheme set forth at WAC Chapter 173 -60.
32. The notion that a small children's playground will generate noise in the 115 dBa range is
unsupported by the technical literature and contradicted by common sense. A standard reference,
Cowan's Handbook of Environmental Acoustics, characterizes "amplified rock music" at 110 dBa and a
"busy city street" and a "loud shout" both at 80 dBa. Specific studies of playground noise (mainly
from Britain) describe measured levels starting within the 56 — 57 dBa range and rising to about 65
dBa. A February 22, 2016, preliminary noise study done for a proposed private school in San Diego
County displayed the virtues of being both recently performed and encompassing assumptions
comparable to the Montessori context. It is worth quoting:
Noise level measurements were taken at an existing school facility (The Classical Academies)
with approximately 400 students, located in Escondido, CA on September 19, 2012 by Ldn
Consulting. Short term measurements were conducted of the children playing in the larger play
field. The results of the noise measurements varied between 60 -64 dBA for the children playing
at a distance of 25 feet from the main activities in the center of the playing field. For purposes
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 6
of this analysis and to be conservative, the higher noise level of 64 dBA will be utilized for each
of the playing areas and the courtyard. The nearest property line to the playground area is
approximately 150 feet to the west... The outdoor play area is located 150 -feet from the nearest
property line to the east. Based on the distance separation the noise levels would diminish to 47
dBA at the property lines.
33. Based on these comparable noise generation and attenuation assumptions, the noise level at the
existing Montessori playground might reach as high as 65 dBa at the nearby southern property line but
would be expected to decrease to less than 47 dBa at the McDonnell residence. By way of context, the
difference between 65 dBa and 115 dBa sound sources is far bigger than the raw numbers suggest. The
sound energy represented by the decibel scale doubles with every 10 dBa increase. So while 115 dBa
looks like it should represent less than a doubling of the 65 dBa sound energy level, in actuality it is 32
times greater.
34. More fundamentally, from a regulatory standpoint the McDonnell factual situation does not
support remedial action by the City. First, the playground at issue is an existing facility, not a new
facility to be constructed under the school expansion proposal. It would thus not be subject to
regulation within this proceeding unless credible evidence was offered that its expanded use would
create significant additional noise impacts above their current level. The applicant's administrative
head, Meghan Skotheim, testified that because additional new playground facilities will be built under
the current proposal, the existing facility nearest the McDonnell residence will be used in the future by
larger numbers of children at any single time but for fewer daily play periods. These facts are not
sufficient to support an inference of increased overall impacts.
35. Finally, the relevant state noise standards do not by their own terms pertain to a school
playground use of the type encountered here. WAC 173 -60 -040 describes the noise standards to be
used in a regulatory analysis but the following section, WAC 173 -60 -050, limits their scope by
supplying a list of exemptions from such standards. WAC 173- 60- 050(4)(k) provides that "(tlhe
following shall be exempt from all provisions of WAC 173- 60- 040:...(k) Sounds caused by natural
phenomena and unamplified human voices." In the absence of evidence that the school employs sound
amplification equipment in conjunction with its playground activities, the state noise standards as
written do not apply.
CONCLUSIONS
1. BIMC 2.16.040E states the following criteria to be applicable to a site plan and design review
approval:
1. The site plan and design is in conformance with applicable code provisions and development
standards of the applicable zoning district, unless a standard has been modified as a housing
design demonstration project pursuant to BIMC 2.16,020. Q;
2. The locations of the buildings and structures, open spaces, landscaping, pedestrian, bicycle
and vehicular circulation systems are adequate, safe, efficient and in conformance with the
nonmotorized transportation plan;
3. The Kitsap County 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
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 7
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.
b. If the health district recommends approval of the application with respect to those items in
subsection E.3.a of this section, the health district shall so advise the director.
c. If the health district recommends disapproval of the application, it shall provide a written
explanation to the director.
4, 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 and enjoyment of properties
downstream; and
c. The streets and pedestrian ways as proposed align with and are otherwise coordinated with
streets serving adjacent properties; and
d. The streets and pedestrian ways as proposed are adequate to accommodate anticipated
traffic; 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 applicable 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
Development Standards Manual," unless the city engineer has approved a variation to the road
standards in that document based on his or her determination that the variation meets the
purposes of BIMC Title 18.
5. The site plan and design is consistent with all applicable design guidelines in BIMC Title 18,
unless strict adherence to a guideline has been modified as a housing design demonstration
project pursuant to BIMC 2.16.020.Q;
6. No harmful or unhealthful conditions are likely to result from the proposed site plan;
7. The site plan and design is in conformance with the comprehensive plan and other applicable
adopted community plans;
8. Any property subject to site plan and design review that contains a critical area or buffer, as
defined in Chapter 16_20 BIMC, conforms to all requirements of that chapter;
9. Any property subject to site plan and design review that is within shoreline jurisdiction, as
defined in Chapter 16_12 BIMC, conforms to all requirements of that chapter;
10. 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;
11. The site plan and design has been prepared consistent with the purpose of the site design
review process and open space goals;
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 8
12. For applications in the B11 zoning district, the site plan and development proposal include
means to integrate and re -use on -site storm water as site amenities.
2. As summarized in the findings above and documented in both the staff report and the materials
submitted by the applicant, the proposal, as conditioned, is in conformance with the Bainbridge Island
Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code. The proposed development provides for the expansion of an
existing educational facility, a use conditionally allowed by the Municipal Code within the R -1 zoning
district. The requirements of BIMC 17.20.020 are not relevant to this application because the proposal
contains no new dwelling units and is not located within the B/1 zoning district.
3. The Health District reviewed the project and raised no objections. The City's Development
Engineer reviewed the submitted civil plans and, subject to appropriate conditions, found them to be
consistent with applicable requirements. The proposed development was reviewed and recommended
for approval by the Design Review Board. The designs of the building form, wall articulation, roof
form, landscaping and overall layout are consistent with the intent of the applicable design guidelines.
4. The proposed site plan provides building layout, parking and circulation systems that are an
efficient use of the available land while providing required setbacks and screening from the adjacent
properties as well as open space. No critical areas issues have been identified. The proposed site plan
was prepared consistent with the overall purpose and goals of the Site Plan and Design Review process.
This process provided a means for guiding the development in a logical, safe, attractive and expedient
manner. The requirements of BIMC 2.16.040E for a site plan and design review approval have been
met by the proposal.
5. BIMC 2.16.110D and E provide the decisional criteria governing approval of a major
conditional use permit application in a residential zone:
D. Decision Criteria.
1. A conditional use may be approved or approved with conditions jf`
a. The conditional use is harmonious and compatible in design, character and
appearance with the intended character and quality of development in the vicinity of the
subject property and with the physical characteristics o. the subject property; provided,
that in the case of a housing design demonstration project any differences in design,
character or appearance that are in furtherance of the purpose and decision criteria of
BIMC 2.16.020. Q shall not result in denial of a conditional use permit for the project;
and
h. The conditional use will be served by adequate public,facilities including roads,
water, fire protection, sewage disposal facilities and storm drainage,facilities; and
c. The conditional use will not be materially detrimental to uses or property in the
vicinity of the subject property; and
d. The conditional use is in accord with the comprehensive plan and other applicable
adopted community plans, including the nonnuotorized transportation plan; and
e. The conditional use complies with all other provisions of the BIMC, unless a
provision has been modified as a housing design demonstration project pursuant to
BIMC 2 16 020.Q; and
f. All necessary measures have been taken to eliminate or reduce to the greatest extent
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 9
possible the impacts that the proposed use may have on the immediate vicinity of the
subject property; and
g. Noise levels shall be in compliance with BIMC 16.16.020 and 16.16.040. A; and
h. The vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation meets all applicable city standards,
unless the city engineer has modified the requirements of BIMC 18.15.02 . B.4 and B.5,
allows alternate driveway and parking area surfaces, and confirmed that those surfaces
meet city requirements for handling surface water and pollutants in accordance with
Chapters 15.20 and 15_21 BIMC; and
i. The city engineer has determined that the conditional use meets the following decision
criteria.
i. The conditional use confirms to regulations concerning drainage in Chapters
15_20 and 15 21 BIMC; and
ii. The conditional use will not cause an undue burden on the drainage basin or
water quality and will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of
properties downstream; and
iii. The streets and pedestrian ways as proposed align with and are otherwise
coordinated with streets serving adjacent properties; and
iv. The streets and pedestrian ways as proposed are adequate to accommodate
anticipated traffic; and
v. If the conditional use will rely on public water or sewer services, there is
capacity in the water or seiner system (as applicable) to serve the conditional
use, and the applicable service(s) can be made available at the site; and
vi. The conditional use conforms to the "City of Bainbridge Island Engineering
Design and Development Standards Manual, " unless the city engineer has
approved a variation to the road standards in that document based on his or her
determination that the variation meets the purposes of'BIMC Title 1.
j. If a major conditional use is processed as a housing design demonstration project
pursuant to BIMC 2.16.020. Q, the above criteria will be considered in conjunction with
the purpose, goals, policies, and decision criteria of'BIMC 2,16.020. Q.
2. If no reasonable conditions can be imposed that ensure the application meets the decision
criteria of this chapter, then the application shall be denied.
E. Additional Decision Criteria for Institutions in Residential Zones.
Applications to locate any of those uses categorized as educational facilities, governmental
facilities, religious.,tkilities, health care facilities, cultural facilities, or chubs in Table
18.09.020 in residential zones shall be processed as motor conditional use permits and shall be
required to meet the following criteria, in addition to those in subsection D of this section:
1. All sites must front on roads classified as residential suburban, collector; or arterial on the
Bainbridge Island functional road classifcation neap.
2. If the traffic study shows an impact on the level of service, those impacts have been mitigated
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 10
as required by the city engineer.
3. If the application is located outside of Winslow study area, the project shall provide
vegetated perimeter baffers in compliance with BIMC I8 15.010.
4. The proposal meets the requirements of the commerciallmixed use design guidelines in BIMC
18.18.030. C.
5. The scale of proposed construction including bulk and height and architectural design
features is compatible with the immediately surrounding area.
6. 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 E, but may not waive those required elsewhere in the BIMC.
7. Lot coverage does not exceed 50 percent of the allowable lot coverage in the zone in which
the institution is located, except that existing public schools and governmental facilities, as
defined in BIMC Title 18, shall be allowed 100 percent of the lot coverage established in the
underlying zoning district in which it is located unless conditions are required to limit the lot
coverage to mitigate impacts of the use.
6. The proposed development is for the expansion of an existing private school. With few
surrounding single - family residential uses, the Montessori Country School, which has been in existence
and operation at this location for many years, fits well into the neighborhood pattern. Other adjacent
developments include a few larger lot residences and a public park to the west across Arrow Point
Drive. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive
Plan.
7. As conditioned, the proposed use will be adequately served by public roads, water, sewer, fire
protection and storm drainage facilities. Allowing the expansion of the school will not be materially
detrimental to existing uses in the vicinity because the site's function, although intensified, will
continue much as it has for many years. Proper access, parking, circulation, landscaping are being
provided. The conditional use complies, as do the buildings analyzed within the Site Plan Review, with
all applicable provisions of the BIMC. The DRB reviewed the project and provided a recommendation
of approval.
8. The Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit applications have been reviewed by the
City's development engineer and, as conditioned, the vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities plans
meet all applicable City standards and pollution controls. The project trip generation data did not
demonstrate an increased level of service impact requiring mitigation.
9. Neighborhood impacts of potential concern included stormwater management in the site's
eastern basin and the possibility of noise impacts to the residential property adjacent to the south. As
conditioned, stormwater runoff in the eastern basin can be dispersed onsite. Proper analysis indicated
that the alleged noise impacts had been incorrectly characterized both as to their intensity and
regulatory consequences.
10. Based on the record as a whole, the school expansion application meets the requirements of
BIMC 2.16. I l OD and E for the issuance of a major conditional use permit.
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 11
DECISION
The Montessori Country School Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan and Design Review applications
(file no. PLN 17677 CUP/ SPR) are APPROVED, subject to the following conditions:
SEPA Conditions
1. To avoid impacts to vegetation, no construction activity shall occur in landscape buffers or within
the critical root zone of significant trees within landscape buffers, including staging, storage,
materials laydown, parking, construction vehicle turnaround, or equipment.
2. To avoid impacts to historic and cultural resources, work shall immediately stop if any historical or
archaeological artifacts are uncovered during excavation or construction and the Department of
Planning and Community Development and the Washington State Office of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation shall be immediately notified. Construction shall only continue thereafter in
compliance with the applicable provisions of law.
Project Conditions
3. The authorization for construction activities 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 Site Plan and Design Review and Conditional Use permits except: The
applicant must file for building permit to accommodate phased construction of building six within
ten years of the effective date of this permit or the authorization to construct building six expires.
4. Construction plans shall substantially conform to plans submitted on June 15, 2016, except for
modifications reflecting compliance with these conditions of approval, and except as follows:
Sheet A -0.I submitted on July 11, 2016; Sheets A -1.2, Cl, C2, LI and L2 submitted on January 24,
2017.
5. Prior to any construction activities, the applicant shall obtain the appropriate permits from the City
of Bainbridge Island, including but not limited to clearing, grading, and /or building permits.
6. The project shall comply with the following conditions of the City Engineer:
a. Final civil improvement plans shall be submitted with building permit application. Upon
approval to construct, all necessary infrastructure serving the site must be completed prior to the
first final building inspection.
b. As -built civil construction plans stamped by a civil engineer shall be provided by the applicant
prior to the first final building inspection.
c. The preconstruction condition ofArrow Point Drive fronting the property shall be photo
documented to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to issuance of any permit. Prior to the
final inspection of the final building damage to the road caused by heavy construction
equipment and traffic shall be fixed by the permit holder.
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 12
d. Shoulder improvements along the frontage of Arrow Point Drive are required as a condition of
development to include construction of a three -to -five foot width gravel shoulder.
e. Paved driveway aprons matching the surfacing on Arrow Point Drive shall be provided from the
roadway for a distance of 20 feet from the edge of the Arrow Point pavement.
f. A maintenance plan for the internal roadway and parking lot is required with the first building
permit. Track -out of dirt and silt from the site onto the roadway is not allowed. Cloudy runoff
leaving the site is not allowed.
g. All on -site stormwater facilities shall remain privately owned and maintained.
I) The applicant shall submit an operation and maintenance plan for the on -going maintenance
of the storm drainage systems to the satisfaction of the City Engineer with the first building
permit application.
2) Annual inspection and maintenance reports shall be provided to the City.
3) A recorded Declaration of Covenant for Stormwater System Operation and Maintenance
will be required prior to the first final building inspection. The approved language for the
Declaration of Covenant is found in BIMC Chapter 15.21, Exhibit A.
h. Prior to the fast final building inspection the applicant shall provide a recorded covenant
protecting the forested area as identified in Sheet C2 Utility and Drainage Plan submitted to the
City on January 24, 2017. The covenant should be carefully worded to allow for installation
and maintenance of stormwater facilities and drainfield facilities which are within the area
proposed for retention of significant trees and understory.
i. A right -of -way construction permit is required prior to any construction activities within the
right -of -way and is subject to separate conditions and bonding requirements.
j. A Stormwater Conveyance System Connection Application shall be submitted with the right -of-
way construction permit application for locations where stormwater will enter the City system.
k. The project requires a Construction Stormwater General Permit from the Washington State
Department of Ecology. No land clearing or construction permits shall be issued prior to
obtaining the State permit.
1. Prior to the first final building permit inspection, the applicant's civil engineer shall submit to
the City Engineer a plan for assessing the adequacy of the site's eastern basin stormwater
dispersion system to be based on its actual performance over a five -year period of usage. This
plan shall describe feasible options for system modification and remediation if within the five -
year assessment period its dispersion pipes demonstrate a lack of capacity to accommodate
satisfactorily all eastern basin flows and avoid downslope impacts. As a condition of approving
the proposed assessment plan, the City Engineer may require the applicant to post a bond
sufficient to cover the cost of implementing a feasible system modification option if such
remediation should become necessary.
7. The project shall comply with the following conditions of the Fire Marshal:
b. The project shall be equipped throughout with a monitored fire alarm system.
c. All classrooms shall exit directly outside.
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 13
d. Occupant load shall be determined by the Building Official.
e. Any building or room with an occupant load greater than 50 shall be equipped with an
automatic fire sprinkler system and panic hardware on approved exit doors.
f. All access roads shall be designed to accommodate fire apparatus (load, width, grade, angle
of approach and departure).
g. Minimum 12 -foot access road width shall not be diminished by parked vehicles. No
Parking / Fire Lane signage is required in areas where this could occur.
h. Fire lane on north side of property shall be marked `No Parking / Fire Lane'.
i. All fire apparatus access roads shall have a clear overhead height of not less than 13.5 feet.
8. Vehicle parking or standing, and / or construction staging, shall be prohibited within the right -of-
way during the construction period unless specifically authorized by the Public Works Department.
9. A total of six bicycle spaces must be provided at a minimum. Bicycle facilities shall allow secure
locking of both the frame and wheels of a bicycle.
10. With application for any construction activity, including grading and /or vegetation removal, the
applicant shall provide plans that identify areas of prohibited disturbance which are necessary to
preserve ecological function, including but not limited to: The dripline or critical root zone (as
identified by a consulting arborist) of significant trees, areas proposed for other retained vegetation,
future raingarden areas, and future planting areas which are larger than 400 square feet in size. The
plans shall label fencing required through these conditions of approval, along with any vegetation
protection measures identified by the applicant's arborist.
11. Prior to any construction activity, a clearing permit shall be obtained authorizing fencing to be
erected and posted with signs to protect areas of prohibited disturbance. Protective fencing shall
remain in place until construction is complete; earlier removal of any portion of the fencing is
subject to approval of the Planning Division.
a. Fencing location, materials and signage shall be approved by the Planning Division prior to
installation.
b. Temporary chain link fence a minimum five feet in height with tubular steel poles or "T" posts
shall delineate the area of prohibited disturbance that lies within the perimeter boundary of the
roadside buffer, the area of existing vegetation to be retained between the roadside buffer and
the parking lot, and the interior landscape perimeter buffer adjacent to the southernmost parking
spaces. The fencing shall be configured to provide for installation of the driveway, path and
stormwater pipe through the buffer. Special care shall be taken to protect the significant trees
and vegetation adjacent to the driveway.
c. Orange plastic fencing shall delineate the perimeter landscape buffer adjacent to the proposed
primary drainfield.
12. Roadside and perimeter landscape buffers shall be maintained for the life of the project At a
minimum, roadside buffers shall meet the full- screen standard and perimeter buffers shall meet
the partial screen standard of BIMC 18.15.
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 14
13. New plantings shall be the following heights at time of planting: Evergreen trees shall be not
less than six feet in height; Deciduous trees shall be not less than two -inch dbh; Evergreen
shrubs shall be not less than 18 inches in height.
14. All plantings shall be installed or installation financially assured in accordance with BIMC
18.15.010.H. prior to occupancy of any of the new buildings. Subsequent to installation
approval by the Department, maintenance assurity shall be required in accordance with BIMC
18.15.010. H.
15. Internal walkways shall be surfaced with nonskid hard surfaces, meet handicapped - accessibility
requirements and be designed to provide a minimum of five feet of unobstructed width.
16. Where walkways cross vehicular driving lanes, the walkways shall be constructed of contrasting
materials or with maintained painted markings. The walkway adjacent to the pick -up / drop -off
lane shall be curbed and raised six inches above adjacent vehicular surface grade, except where
required to meet accessibility standards.
17. Except in locations where protection of existing trees may be compromised, raised curbs shall
be used to define driveways from the public right -of -way, landscape areas within the parking
lot, the ends of parking aisles, and the vehicular circulation pattern.
18. Outdoor lighting fixture shall meet the standards contained in BIMC 18.15.040.
19. Outdoor trash / recycle receptacles shall be enclosed with a solid structure / gated and screened
from view with evergreen vegetation.
20. Prior to building permit issuance, the landowner must record a notice on title listing these
conditions of approval with the Kitsap County Auditor.
ORDERED February 13, 2017.
City of Bainbridge island
The Hearing Examiner is authorized to make the City of Bainbridge Island's final decision on
conjoined Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan and Design Review applications. A party with
standing may seek judicial review of this decision by filing a timely suit in Kitsap County Superior
Court under the Land Use Petition Act.
The exhibit list prepared by the Clerk of the Hearing Examiner's Office is attached.
CUP AND SITE PLAN REVIEW DECISION - 15
Staff Contact:
Kelly Tayara, Planner
EXHIBIT LIST
Montessori Country School
PLN 17677 SPR / CUP
Hearina Examiner: Stafford L. Smith
Public Hearing:
February 1, 2017
NO.
DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION
DATE
1
Application — Conditional Use Permit
06/15/2016
Received
2
Application — Site Plan and Design Review
06/15/2016
Received
3
MCS Parent Handbook (excerpt) regarding Traffic Flow
06/1512016
Received
4
Traffic Plan
06/15/2016
Received
5
Parking Agreement with the Parks Dept.
06/15/2016
Received
6
Browne Wheeler Engineers Inc. Drainage Report dated March 7, 2016
06115/2016
Received
7
Environmental (SEPA) Checklist with Staff Comments
06/15/2016
Prepared
8
Landscape Plans
01/24/2017
Revised
9
Existing Conditions Drawings
06/15/2016
Received
10
Civil Plans
01/24/2017
Revised
11
Architectural Drawings
06/15/20165
07/11/2016
and
01/24/2017
12
Bainbridge Island Fire Department Memos
06/24/2016
Dated
13
Vegetation Protection Sign
N/A
14
Health District Review Comments
07/08/2016
Dated
15
Public Comment Emails
07/2016 and
08/2016
Dated
16
Notice of Application and SEPA Comment Period and Affidavit of Publication
07/15/2016
Published
17
Browne Wheeler Engineers, Inc. Memorandum — East Drainage Basin
09/21/2016
Dated
18
Building Site Application for On -Site Sewage System (Health District)
09/21/2016
Received
19
Browne Wheeler Engineers, Inc. — Modified Utility Plan — West Basin Revision
09/22/2016
Dated
02/01/2017
Staff Contact:
Kelly Tayara, Planner
EXHIBIT LIST
Montessori Country School
PLN 17677 SPR / CUP
Hearina Examiner: Stafford L. Smith
Public Hearing:
February 1, 2017
NO.
DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION
DATE
20
Kitsap County Unclassified Use Permit
1990
Dated
21
Design Review Board Minutes and Recommendation
10/17/2016
Dated
22
Development Engineer Information Request to Complete Review
11/07/2016
Dated
23
Browne Wheeler Engineers, Inc. Memorandum in response to Development Engineer
11/14/2016
11/07/2016 Request
Dated
24
Geotechnical Engineering Report from Aspect Consulting
11/14/2016
Received
25
Transportation Solutions Inc. Traffic Analysis
12/14/2016
Dated
26
Certificate of Traffic Concurrency
27
Development Engineer Memorandum Comments and Recommendations
12/19/2016
Dated
28
Email to Planner from Development Engineer re: Condition Number 5 of 12/19/2016
12/21/2016
Recommendation
Dated
29
SEPA Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance
12/21/2016
Dated
30
Certificate of Distribution and Posting
01/11/2017
Dated
31
Notice of Hearing and Affidavit of Publication
01/13/2017
Published
32
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
01/12/2017
Dated
33
Certificate of Posting Signs
01/17/2017
Dated
34
Development Engineer Memorandum Modifying 12/19/2016 Recommendations
01/20/2017
Dated
35
Staff Report
01/25/2017
Dated
36
Children and Noise Information Package — World Health Organization
2/1/2017
Admitted
02/01/2017