Loading...
Ordinance No. 2021-12 Relating to improving the early phases of the land use permitting processPage 1 of 33 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-12 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Bainbridge Island, Washington, amending BIMC 2.16.020, 2.16.040, 2.16.070, 2.16.110, 2.16.125, and Chapter 18.18 BIMC relating to improving the early phases of the land use permitting process. WHEREAS, in mid-2020, Design Review Board members identified the need for more detailed background information prior to holding a Conceptual Review Meeting on early development proposals; and WHEREAS, on August 17, 2020, the Design Review Board began formal discussion of the Design Review Board’s role and changing the pre-application process; and WHEREAS, the Design Review Board appointed a subcommittee to continue more detailed work on proposed process revisions; and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2020, the City Council formed a City Council and Planning Commission joint land use subcommittee (subcommittee) directed by the Council to, among other things, develop a process and list for undertaking work on priorities for land use code revisions; and WHEREAS, the subcommittee’s first phase of work included identifying urgent land use code changes; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 2020, the City Council endorsed beginning work on this first phase of work; and WHEREAS, on October 19, 2020, the Design Review Board reviewed the subcommittee draft proposed process revisions and made recommendations to reorder required meetings for projects that require review by the Design Review Board and a pre- application conference such that the preapplication conference is the first step, prior to Design Review Board Conceptual Review and Design Guidance meetings; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the proposed changes on October 29, 2020 and separated the land use code changes into two phases, with the second phase including improvements to the preapplication process and the role of the Design Review Board and Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, two Planning Commissioners joined the existing three member Design Review Board subcommittee to continue development of specific code improvements related to the preapplication phase of the land use permitting process; and WHEREAS, on December 9 and 16, 2020, the newl y formed Planning Commission/Design Review Board subcommittee reviewed and finalized proposed recommended revisions to the preapplication process revision recommendations; and Page 2 of 33 WHEREAS, the Design Review Board completed their review and recommended final code changes on April 19, 2021; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission discussed this Ordinance No. 2021-12 on March 11, April 22, May 13, and May 27, 2021; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this Ordinance No. 2021-12 on July 8, 2021, and after closing the public hearing, made a recommendation of approval of Ordinance No. 2021-12 to the City Council; and WHEREAS, notice of a SEPA determination of nonsignificance was issued on July 9, 2021; and WHEREAS, notice was given on July 28, 2021 to the Office of Community Development at the Washington State Department of Commerce in conformance with RCW 36.70A.106; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered this ordinance at its meeting on November 9, 2021; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Ordinance No. 2021-12 further on December 14, 2021. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAINBRIDGE ISLAND, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 2.16.020.F of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: F. Design Review Board Review. 1. The design review board shall review and make recommendations on all land use applications as set forth in this section. This design process reflects a collaborative effort between an applicant, the design review board, and the community to better incorporate the vision of the city as outlined in the adopted design standards and guidelines. 2. Subsequent to submittal of preapplication materials, the board shall review a proposal for conformance with applicable design standards and guidelines. The board’s written recommendations shall be included in the staff report transmitted to the planning commission. 3. A board recommendation is not a decision and there is no city appeal of the recommendation. Page 3 of 33 Section 2. Section 2.16.020.I of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: I. Preapplication Procedure. 1. Subject to certain exemptions, all projects are subject to and must complete the site assessment review process set forth and in accordance with Chapter 15.19 BIMC, and projects requiring a preapplication conference have the option of proceeding with the two processes concurrently. Chapter 15.19 BIMC is designed to ensure that future development integrates low impact development practices to the maximum extent practicable, as required by Chapters 15.19 and 15.20 BIMC. 2. The preapplication conference is an informal discussion between a potential applicant, interested citizens, and city staff., and the design review board (if applicable) regarding a proposed project. 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 43.21 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; Page 4 of 33 b. Minor or major variance; c. Minor or major site plan and design review approval; d. Preliminary long subdivision and short subdivision; e. Shoreline substantial development permit, shoreline variance, and shoreline conditional use permit; f. Shoreline substantial development exemption for new shoreline armoring (including bulkheads, revetments, and soft shore designs); g. Comprehensive plan amendment; h. Reasonable use exception; i. Consolidated project review; and j. Major critical area permit. 4. Except in the case of (a) preliminary short subdivisions and long subdivisions, or (b) shoreline substantial development exemptions or permits for new shoreline armoring (including bulkheads, revetments, and soft shore designs), or (c) where the HDDP process is being used, or (d) where DRB review is required, a preapplication conference may be waived in writing by the director if the director determines the following: a. The application is consistent with applicable codes and ordinances; b. The proposed use is clearly listed as a permitted use or a conditional use in the zoning district in which it is located; and c. The applicant demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the city’s permit processing procedures. As an additional basis for such a waiver, a preapplication conference may be waived in writing by the director if the director determines that the applicant has attended a consultation meeting within one year of their preapplication meeting, and the director determines that the applicant is in compliance with subsections I.4.a through c of this section. Page 5 of 33 5. In the case of applications where design review board review and a preliminary application conference are required, the land use application shall be reviewed using a two- step preapplication process. As the schedule allows, the applicant shall first meet with the design review board to discuss the design concept, and shall then meet with department staff as described in this section. 5. Applications requiring Design Review Board review shall be first reviewed at a department facilitated preapplication conference and followed up by a summary letter that provides application submittal requirements, as described in this section. The applicant shall then meet with the Design Review Board to discuss the design concept and proceed through the design review process. The preapplication conference application shall be provided to the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. Up to two members of the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission may attend the preapplication conference with the intent of listening and reporting the proposal to the full Design Review Board and Planning Commission at a subsequent meeting. 6. The review process for long subdivisions, major site plan and design review permits, and major conditional use permits shall include a public participation meeting following the procedures outlined in Resolution No. 2010-32 2021-07. The meeting will be held after the design review board meeting, if one is required, the preapplication conference phase of the project Design Review Board Concept Review, during the project proposal phase. 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. Section 3. Section 2.16.020.S.3 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 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 below as outlined in this subsection. outlined in BIMC 2.16.040 (site plans and design review), 2.16.070 (short subdivisions), 2.16.110 (major conditional use permits), 2.16.125 (preliminary long subdivisions), and as outlined in this subsection. Page 6 of 33 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 Title 17, Subdivisions, and BIMC Title 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. Public Participation Program. The applicant is required to participate in one or more community meetings, either through (i) the city’s public participation program following the procedures outlined in Resolution Nos. 2010-32 and 2001-11, or (ii) an equivalent public meeting that includes participation by city staff, as approved by the director. cb. 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 facts, 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 Page 7 of 33 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. dc. Application Submittal. An applicant may submit a land use permit application (subdivision, site plan and design review, or conditional use permit) for a housing design demonstration project after completion of a required conceptual and preapplication review and notification by the city that the proposal qualifies as a housing design demonstration project. Upon receipt of an application, the director shall provide notice to the applicant and public in accordance with subsection M of this section and commence the application review process. Housing design demonstration projects that require more than one land use permit must utilize the consolidated project review process outlined in BIMC 2.16.170. All housing design demonstration project applications, including subdivisions, shall be reviewed by the design review board and the planning commission at public meetings. The design review board and the planning commission shall make recommendations on all housing design demonstration projects. ed. 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. fe. 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. gf. Living Building Challenge. For projects pursuing the Living Building Challenge standard of the International Living Building Institute, the applicant must show proof Page 8 of 33 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 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. Section 4. Sections 2.16.040.D and E of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: D. Review Procedures – Proposal Stage. Review of site plan and design review proposals shall include all of the following in the order listed: 1. Conceptual Proposal Review Meeting. The conceptual proposal review meeting is a means of screening proposals in their earliest stages of design before proponents are committed to a particular design. The conceptual proposal meeting is an opportunity to ensure that the proponent understands the objectives of the review process, design guidelines, and comprehensive plan goals and policies. This early touch allows review bodies to dialogue in an informal manner with the applicant, review the design guidelines and comprehensive plan goals and policies applicable to the site, and explore design concepts and/or options. It is also a means for staff to acquaint the prospective applicant with the procedural steps for subdivision review. The conceptual proposal review meeting will be held at a meeting of the design review board. 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 meeting if the applicant demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the city’s permit processing procedures. Page 9 of 33 2. Design Guidance Review Meeting. The design guidance review meeting is intended to provide input and guidance to an applicant on consistency with applicable design guidelines and comprehensive plan goals and policies, including recommendations for how the project could be revised to achieve greater consistency. The applicant should also make known the potential need and rationale for any departure from the design guidelines or the city of Bainbridge Island design and construction standards and specifications. The design guidance review meeting will be held at a meeting of the design review board. Requirements are described in the administrative manual and include a schematic design and completed design guidelines checklist. 3. Preapplication Conference. The applicant shall participate in a preapplication conference in accordance with the provisions and requirements in BIMC 2.16.020.I. As part of the preapplication phase, applicants are required to participate in a community meeting through the city’s public participation program outlined in Resolution No. 2010-32, except that the community meeting shall be held at a planning commission meeting. The preapplication conference application shall be provided to the design review board. 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 consid er opti onal concepts for a project that may be better suited to t he Island communit y, 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 Page 10 of 33 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 guidelines. The Design Review Board’s written findings will be included in the staff report transmitted to the director or Planning Commission. The Design Review Board shall recommend approval, approval with conditions or departures, or denial. A Design Review Board recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. The Planning Commission may determine that additional design review is required if significant project changes occur following the Final Design Review and Recommendation. E. Review Procedures – Application Stage. Review of site plan and design review applications shall include all of the following: 1. Application. An applicant may submit an application for site plan and design review at any time after completion of the required steps in subsection D of this section or approval of a waiver in accordance with BIMC 2.16.020.I.3 or I.4 or subsection D.1 of this section. The applicant shall submit a complete application with all required submittal requirements listed in the administrative manual. 2. Review by Kitsap Public Health District. a. Upon receipt of the application and determination of completeness, the director shall transmit a copy of the application to the health district. b. The health district shall provide written recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the preliminary long subdivision application pursuant to the decision criteria in subsection F of this section. 3. Review by City Engineer. Page 11 of 33 a. Upon receipt of the application and determination of completeness, the director shall transmit a copy of the application to the city engineer. b. The city engineer shall provide written recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the preliminary long subdivision application pursuant to the decision criteria in subsection F of this section. 4. Review and Recommendation by Design Review Board. a. The purpose of the design review board review and recommendation meeting is to review a proposed project for compliance with applicable design guidelines and to ensure that the project reflects any revisions recommended by the design review board at the design guidance review meeting. The design review board will also consider any requested departures from the design guidelines. b. The design review board will forward written findings, their determination of the project’s consistency with the design 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 design guidelines. The design review board’s written findings will be included in the staff report transmitted to the director or planning commission. c. A design review board recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. 54. 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 Page 12 of 33 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. 65. 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 and planning commission’s Page 13 of 33 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. b. The director shall make compliance with the recommendations of the design review board and/or planning commission a condition of approval, unless the director concludes that the recommendations: i. Reflect inconsistent application of design guidelines or any applicable provisions of this code; ii. Exceed the authority of the design review board or planning commission; iii. Conflict with SEPA conditions or other regulatory requirements applicable to the project; or iv. Conflict with requirements of local, state, or federal law. c. The director shall adopt a planning commission recommendation of denial of an application unless the director concludes that the recommendation: i. Reflects inconsistent application of design guidelines, the comprehensive plan, or any applicable provisions of this code; ii. Exceeds the authority of the design review board or planning commission; iii. Conflicts with SEPA conditions or other regulatory requirements applicable to the project; or iv. Conflicts with requirements of local, state, or federal law. 76. 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 Page 14 of 33 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. Section 5. Sections 2.16.070.D and E of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: D. Review Procedures – Proposal 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.12, and D.23, and D.5 of this section: 1. Conceptual Proposal Review Meeting. The conceptual proposal review meeting is a means of screening short subdivision proposals in their earliest stages of design before proponents are committed to a particular design. The conceptual proposal meeting is an opportunity to ensure that the proponent understands the objectives of the review process, design guidelines, and comprehensive plan goals and policies. This early touch allows review bodies to dialogue in an informal manner with the applicant, review the design guidelines and comprehensive plan goals and policies applicable to the site, and explore design concepts and/or options. It is also a means for staff to acquaint the prospective applicant with the procedural steps for subdivision review. The conceptual proposal review meeting will be held at a meeting of the design review board. 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 meeting if the applicant demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the city’s permit processing procedures. 2. Design Guidance Review Meeting. The design guidance review meeting is intended to provide input and guidance to an applicant on consistency with applicable design guidelines and comprehensive plan goals and policies, including recommendations for how the project could be revised to achieve greater consistency. The applicant should also make known the potential need and rationale for any departure from the design guidelines or the city of Bainbridge Island design and construction standards and specifications. The design guidance review meeting will be held at a meeting of the design review board. Submittal requirements are described in 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 15 of 33 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. 3. Preapplication Conference. The applicant shall participate in a preapplication conference in accordance with the provisions and requirements in BIMC 2.16.020.I. 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 consid er opti onal concepts for a project that may be better suited to t he Island communit y, 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. Page 16 of 33 3. Public Participation Meeting. As part of the project proposal phase, applicants are required to participate in a community meeting through the cit y’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 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 Page 17 of 33 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 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 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. Page 18 of 33 4. Review and Recommendation by Design Review Board. a. Review and recommendation by the design review board is optional. The director shall determine whether review is necessary based on the major issues and specific aspects of the project and any written public comments received during the public comment period. b. The purpose of the design review board review and recommendation meeting is to review a proposed project for compliance with applicable design guidelines and to ensure that the project reflects any revisions recommended by the design review board at the design guidance review meeting. The design review board will also consider any requested departures from the design guidelines. c. The design review board will forward written findings, their determination of the project’s consistency with the design 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 design guidelines. The design review board’s written findings, conclusions, and recommendation will be included in the staff report transmitted to the director or planning commission. d. A design review board recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. 54. Review and Recommendation by Planning Commission. a. Review and recommendation by the planning commission is optional. 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. 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 Page 19 of 33 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, 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. 65. 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, (iii) the recommendation of the design review board, and (iv) consideration of any public comments received. The design review board and 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 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: Page 20 of 33 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. Section 6. Sections 2.16.110.D and E of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: D. Review Procedures – Proposal Stage. Review of major conditional use permit proposals shall include all of the following in the order listed: 1. Conceptual Proposal Review Meeting. The conceptual proposal review meeting is a means of screening proposals in their earliest stages of design before proponents are committed to a particular design. The conceptual proposal meeting is an opportunity to ensure that the proponent understands the objectives of the review process, design guidelines, and comprehensive plan goals and policies. This early touch allows review bodies to dialogue in an informal manner with the applicant, review the design guidelines and comprehensive plan goals and policies applicable to the site, and explore design concepts and/or options. It is also a means for staff to acquaint the prospective applicant with the procedural steps for subdivision review. The conceptual proposal review meeting will be held at a meeting of the design review board. 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 meeting if the applicant demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the city’s permit processing procedures. 2. Design Guidance Review Meeting. The design guidance review meeting is intended to provide input and guidance to an applicant on consistency with applicable design guidelines and comprehensive plan goals and policies, including recommendations for how Page 21 of 33 the project could be revised to achieve greater consistency. The applicant should also make known the potential need and rationale for any departure from the design guidelines or the city of Bainbridge Island design and construction standards and specifications. The design guidance review meeting will be held at a meeting of the design review board. Requirements are described in the administrative manual and include a schematic design and completed design guidelines checklist. 3. Preapplication Conference. The applicant shall participate in a preapplication conference in accordance with the provisions and requirements in BIMC 2.16.020.I. As part of the preapplication phase, applicants are required to participate in a community meeting through the city’s public participation program outlined in Resolution No. 2010-32, except that the community meeting shall be held at a planning commission meeting. The preapplication conference application shall be provided to the design review board. 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 opti onal concepts for a project that may be bett er suited to t he Island communit y, 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. 3. Public Participation Meeting. As part of the project proposal phase, applicants are required to participate in a community meeting through the cit y’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 Page 22 of 33 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 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 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. 2. Review and Recommendation by Design Review Board. a. The purpose of the design review board review and recommendation meeting is to review a proposed project for compliance with applicable design guidelines and to ensure that the project reflects any revisions recommended by the design review board at the design guidance review meeting. The design review board will also consider any requested departures from the design guidelines. Page 23 of 33 b. The design review board will forward written findings, their determination of the project’s consistency with the design 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 design guidelines. The design review board’s written findings will be included in the staff report transmitted to the director or planning commission. c. A design review board recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. 32. 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. 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. Page 24 of 33 f. A planning commission recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. 43. 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. 54. 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. 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; Page 25 of 33 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. Section 7. Section 2.16.125.D and E of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: D. Review Procedures – Proposal Stage. Review of long subdivision proposals shall include all of the following in the order listed: 1. Conceptual Proposal Review Meeting. The conceptual proposal review meeting is a means of screening long subdivision proposals in their earliest stages of design before proponents are committed to a particular design. The conceptual proposal meeting is an opportunity to ensure that the proponent understands the objectives of the review process, design guidelines, and comprehensive plan goals and policies. This early touch allows review bodies to dialogue in an informal manner with the applicant, review the design guidelines and comprehensive plan goals and policies applicable to the site, and explore design concepts and/or options. It is also a means for staff to acquaint the prospective applicant with the procedural steps for subdivision review. The conceptual proposal review meeting will be held at a meeting of the design review board. Submittal requirements are Page 26 of 33 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 meeting if the applicant demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the city’s permit processing procedures. 2. Design Guidance Review Meeting. The design guidance review meeting is intended to provide input and guidance to an applicant on consistency with applicable design guidelines and comprehensive plan goals and policies, including recommendations for how the project could be revised to achieve greater consistency. The applicant should also make known the potential need and rationale for any departure from the design guidelines or the city of Bainbridge Island design and construction standards and specifications. The design guidance review meeting will be held at a meeting of the design review board. Submittal requirements are described in 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 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. Page 27 of 33 3. Preapplication Conference. The applicant shall participate in a preapplication conference in accordance with the provisions and requirements in BIMC 2.16.020.I. As part of the preapplication phase, applicants are required to participate in a community meeting through the city’s public participation program outlined in Resolution No. 2010-32, except that the community meeting shall be held at a planning commission meeting. The preapplication conference application shall be provided to the design review board and planning commission. 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 consid er opti onal concepts for a project that may be better suited to t he Island communit y, 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. 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 28 of 33 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 Communit y 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 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 Page 29 of 33 waiver in accordance with BIMC 2.16.020.I.3 or I.4 or subsection D.1 of this section. The applicant shall submit a complete application with all required submittal requirements listed in the administrative manual. 2. Review by Kitsap Public Health District. a. Upon receipt of the application and determination of completeness, the director shall transmit a copy of the application to the health district. b. The health district shall provide written recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the preliminary long subdivision application pursuant to the decision criteria in subsection F of this section. 3. Review by City Engineer. a. Upon receipt of the application and determination of completeness, the director shall transmit a copy of the application to the city engineer. b. The city engineer shall provide written recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the preliminary long subdivision application pursuant to the decision criteria in subsection F of this section. 4. Review and Recommendation by Design Review Board. a. The purpose of the design review board review and recommendation meeting is to review a proposed project for compliance with applicable design guidelines and to ensure that the project reflects any revisions recommended by the design review board at the design guidance review meeting. The design review board will also consider any requested departures from the design guidelines. b. The design review board will forward written findings, their determination of the project’s consistency with the design 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 design guidelines. The design review board’s written findings, conclusions, and recommendation will be included in the staff report transmitted to the director or planning commission. Page 30 of 33 c. A design review board recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. 54. 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, 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. d. 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. e. A planning commission recommendation is not a final decision and therefore there is no appeal of the recommendation. 65. Review by Director. a. The director shall review the application materials, information provided by the health district and city engineer, 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. Page 31 of 33 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. 76. 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. 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. Section 8. Sections 18.18.010 and 18.18.030 of the Bainbridge Island Municipal Code are hereby amended as shown in Exhibit A, “Design for Bainbridge,” and as follows: Page 32 of 33 Sections: 18.18.010 Applicability. 18.18.020 Promoting sustainable development. 18.18.030 Specific design regulations, standards, and guidelines. 18.18.010 Applicability. All development, exterior renovation and redevelopment shall comply with the following regulations, standards, and guidelines, as applicable. In some cases, design standards in this chapter may be waived or modified through the housing design demonstration program in BIMC 2.16.020.S. 18.18.020 Promoting sustainable development. The site designs of all new development and redevelopment should accommodated energy-conserving and water- conserving technology and design principles providing for solar and other renewable energy production where possible. Low impact development principles require such measures as minimizing the extent of land disturbing activities and hard surfaces; preserving native vegetation, topography, and natural drainage patterns; and using LID BMPs such as cisterns, bioretention/rain gardens, and permeable pavement where feasible. 18.18.030 Specific design regulations standards and guidelines. All development subject to design review shall comply with the requirements of the Bainbridge Island design review regulations standards and guidelines, “Design for Bainbridge.” In the event of a conflict between two or more design standards or regulations, the Bainbridge Island design review regulations standards and guidelines, “Design for Bainbridge,” shall apply. Section 9. Severability. 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 10. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from its passage and publication as required by law. Page 33 of 33 PASSED by the City Council this 14th day of December, 2021. APPROVED by the Mayor this 14th day of December, 2021. Rasham Nassar, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE: Christine Brown, MMC, City Clerk FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: November 5, 2021 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: December 14, 2021 PUBLISHED: December 24, 2021 EFFECTIVE DATE: December 29, 2021 ORDINANCE NUMBER: 2021-12