Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Welcome to the June 16th, 2026 meeting of the Kitsap County Planning Commission. Thank you for your participation. Before we begin this evening's proceedings, I'd like to remind everyone that this is an official meeting of the Kitsap County Planning Commission conducted in accordance with the Washington State Open Public Meetings Act and Robert's Rules of Order. We ask that all attendees remain respectful throughout the proceedings. Please refrain from cheering, clapping, calling out, displaying signs, or any behavior that may make it difficult for others to hear or follow the discussion. Such behavior can also be intimidating to those who may wish to express differing opinions. These proceedings are intended to provide a fair and orderly opportunity for all voices to be heard on the record. If disruptions occur, any planning commissioner may call for order and the chair may ask for a break. Disruptive individuals may be asked to leave the meeting room. Thank you for helping us maintain a courteous, respectful, and professional environment. The first item on the agenda is introductions. I'm going to start online. Commissioner Douthat.

Hi. Danielle Douthat from South Kitsap.

Commissioner Vliet.

David Vliet, North Kitsap. Ryan Wixson, Central Kitsap.

Kathy Meisenberg, North Kitsap. Ashley Hall, South Kitsap.

Dane Fenner, Central Kitsap.

Caleb Nelson, South Kitsap.

All right. The next item on our agenda is our meeting protocol. Please silence all electronic devices during the meeting. If you're attending in person, please refrain from having conversations with other attendees or staff during the meeting. If you wish to provide comments, please wait until the general public comment period or the public hearing comment period. We offer four methods of public comment. Please raise your hand if you wish to speak and you will be called upon. Please approach the podium and speak clearly into the microphone. Our virtual attendees, use the raise hand button at the bottom of your Zoom window at the appropriate time. Your name will be called and the microphone will be unmuted. Our call in attendees, press star nine on your phone keypad to signal that you wish to comment. The last four digits of your phone number will be announced and you will be connected. You may need to press star six to unmute your line. For our written comments and testimony, written comments may be submitted to staff or emailed to cjewel at kitsap.gov by 2 p.m. on the day prior to the meeting. Please include the meeting date, your name, and the agenda item or subject you're addressing. Submitted comments will be entered into the record at the appropriate time. For all speakers, please state your name and the general area in which you live. Comments are normally limited to two minutes for the general public comment period and three minutes for public hearing comments. These time limits may be adjusted by the chair when appropriate. Our next item up is going to be the adoption of the agenda. Do I hear a motion to adopt our agenda this evening?

I move to adopt the agenda with the exception of the minutes, which I guess we don't have tonight to approve.

All second.

Are there any other amendments from the Planning Commission? Seeing none, all those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. What would you like me to do about Commissioner Douthat? I'm not able to get her vote. So sorry, Clara. I'm not sure what my...

We can have her abstain from it.

Oh, okay. Beautiful. Commissioner Douthat, you'll be abstaining from voting this evening because we're not able to capture your vote on video. All those opposed, so sorry. It's unanimous. It moves forward. So sorry. Thank you. I apologize about that, everyone. All righty. And that's going to bring us to our first general public comment period. Do we have anyone in the room that's wishing to speak? Seeing none. And do we have anybody online? I am seeing none. If there are no additional speakers, I will close the first general public comment period. And next up is our conflict of interest training with Lisa Nichol, the Kitsap County prosecuting attorney.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Lisa Nichol. I am the deputy, or AWD, Kitsap County prosecutor. And I advise DCD, and I've been asked to present to you some quarterly training this year. We already did quarterly training one back in March on the OPMA, Open Public Meetings Act. And today we're going to talk about your next one. She brings it up. It's an exciting topic of conflict of interest. There we go. Okay. Conflict of interest. So the reason we're here to talk about it is because it's in the Kitsap County Code. When you all were appointed by the commissioners, one of their requirements is to appoint planning commission members who are free of incompatibility, conflict of interest, and association with municipal organizations, entities, and agencies and entities within Kitsap County. So we might get to talk about these other factors maybe a little bit later if there's an interest. But currently, this one is about the conflict of interest piece of that. And so conflict of interest, what it is. In short, it's where you have a private interest and a public interest or duty that conflicts. They're incompatible or they appear to be incompatible. You have loyalty to the Planning Commission and your duties. but perhaps you have a personal or business interest that you have different loyalties to. So that's it in a nutshell. They can lead to unfair outcomes for either side, whether it's a person appearing before you or maybe your business or personal, and then any actual violation can lead to some serious consequences. So it's good to have this training and know what's out there. There are generally three types of conflicts of interest. These are kind of in ranking order. The first is perceived, which is what it sounds like. Somebody thinks you have a conflict either with your duties as a planning commission and a personal interest or a business interest just because of your role in those without any factual background. Sometimes the rules say you even want to avoid perceived conflicts, so it just depends on the circumstances of what you can do about that, because someone's opinion doesn't necessarily make it improper, but it's something to watch out for. Potential is when your two parties are in the same position, but there's not an actual conflict at that point. And in my world, the easiest way to explain it is if a plaintiff sues two defendants at the outset, they may be in the same position. They both blame the plaintiff for whatever's happening, but then further discovery goes on and the defendants have learned more information, and then they start pointing fingers at each other. At that point, that becomes an actual conflict of interest, but in the beginning, it was only a potential. So there's no change in the positions of the parties, just new information creates an actual conflict versus a potential. We could ask, we can go through that more if there's questions, but it's sometimes hard in the abstract. So what kinds of interests can be in conflict? The most common are financial, and we'll get into more about accepting gifts. The county has a new ethics code that helps lay that out. It's a little bit changed from what the standard used to be. They also have personal interests. If you own property and yet you're making a zoning change and you come to the planning commission for a rezone, which you don't hear those anymore. but you have a personal interest in that outcome. The next one is just loyalties. Say you've got a family member, you want to do right by them, but then you've got your planning commission duties, and you want to do right by that too. So those are the interests that are typically involved in a conflict of interest case. So turning to the Kitsap County Ethics Code, CHAPTER OR SECTION 325-030, AND I PROVIDED CLARA A LINK WITH A PRINTOUT FOR THIS CHAPTER PLUS SOME STATE STATUTES WE'LL GET INTO AND SOME OTHER MATERIALS THAT ARE USEFUL FOR YOU TO READ THROUGH IF YOU HAVE TIME, LATE-NIGHT READING. THE GENERAL PROHIBITION IS THAT NO COMMISSION MEMBER, ANY OF YOU, MAY DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, SO DIRECTLY IS OBVIOUSLY SOMEBODY GIVING YOU SOMETHING TO YOU DIRECTLY OR IF Indirectly is more in a roundabout somebody gives it to somebody else they benefit and then you benefit and it It's just a larger circle to take that into account You may not directly or indirectly receive except take seek or solicit all those kind of generally are the same Types of things you're asking for or you're seeking or you actually receive less common in your situation is giving but that's also applicable you can't give anything of economic value it obviously has value to it as a gift gratuity or favor that's what the statute or the provision says but the rest of it really talks about gifts all encompassing gratuity and favors included in that And then if it could be reasonably expected that whatever this thing of economic value is being given or sought would influence your vote or your action or your judgment in a particular case. Or it could be post-action and it could be considered a reward for either doing or not doing something. So that's a general prohibition. It's harder to think of those in abstract, so the code also provides some examples. These are, most of these are listed here, or most of those that are in code are listed here. You can't participate in a quasi-judicial proceeding with also a financial interest in the matter. Really the only quasi-judicial proceeding that you are dealing with right now is open space applications, and I know there's some discussion about whether that If it needs to go before you guys, take that off and just let you do with the comp plan and development regulations. But to the extent open space applications come before you, you can't also have a financial interest in that. And if you do, you need to recuse yourself or state it on the record. More generally, you can't use your position or any confidential information you learn here for financial gain for yourself or others. It talks about special privilege, and just to give a little bit more context to that, special privilege is getting to do something that somebody else wouldn't get to do. And by the flip side of that, an exemption is not having to do something that others are allowed to do. So that's a benefit to you, and you're not supposed to use your position here in the Planning Commission to get that affected. You also can't accept or ask for a gift for your own personal benefit. We'll talk a bit about what a gift is. And more generally, you can't accept a gift as an inducement or to have that person say, you know, please vote for me and I'll give you this, or I'll give you this if you don't vote. So it's influencing your decision. This one probably doesn't affect you as much because there isn't Planning Commission doesn't do contracts, and so you're not supposed to accept a gift from a person who is seeking to do business, which typically is having a contract with the county. And then even if any of the exemptions apply, which we'll talk about, if you're given anything that is intended to or somehow designed to impair your impartiality, it's a no, you can't accept it. And then kind of on top of that, just as a background information, if something is a gift, which we'll go through that, only the board of county commissioners, the county administrator, and then the director, so in this case, DCD, are actually allowed to accept those gifts. So if something qualifies as a gift that we'll get into it, you'd have to talk to DCD management or just say no and refer them to DC management. So what is a gift, gratuity, or favor? General definition is anything you didn't buy. You know, normally you go to a store, you hand money over, and they give you something. That's a purchase. It's not a gift. But what specifically? And so I put these items on here just as a way to easily show what those are because there's a whole list in the code. So the flowers and the balloons are representative of things of... gifts of congratulations or condolences, maybe somebody had a pet that died and someone wants to give them flowers, that's okay. Anything has to be of nominal value though, which means less than $50 per source per year. So if somebody gives you a $20 value now and a $30 value later, that's okay, it's still under 50, but if they give you a 30 and a 30 later on, that's over the threshold, but it's within the calendar year. Other examples are like the pen and paper when you go to, I can't think of it, but a promotional item. You go to a booth and they always have pens. Those are not problematic. Or if somebody comes and gives you pens, that's not a technical gift. The awards, you can accept an award for maybe there's a community organization that is wanting to recognize you for something. If it's less than the $50, it's not technically a gift. Social events we put on there in between. It's like DCD can do a social event and invite you guys. That's not a gift. You guys can have a social event together. It's not a gift. Group discounts. I don't know if any of those apply to you, but cell phone sometimes plans have discounts or you go to a gym and you get a discount by being affiliated with the county. There's other prizes like somebody is doing a chance board or some other lottery. That's not a gift conferences. I don't know if you guys go to conferences, but there was a question at one point, can we accept the food? Can we accept the pen and papers and things like that? That's one reason why the County wrote this is to be clear, um, that you can accept those. You're going to conference. Everyone gets the food. You can partake in the food. because the RCW on this is you can't accept anything, not even de minimis, and that was a little bit too hard to manage and practice. And then finally on the left, the little heart. If you're receiving a gift unrelated to your position in the Planning Commission, a family member or whatever, that's not a gift that we're talking about here. Again, these are the most probably common ones. There are a few others in the... And there are some other limitations just generally in state statute. These, I don't expect they would come up very often, but you are the ones that are appointed by the commissioners. You can't delegate your duties to somebody else. You can't impersonate a public officer. You can't be Clara and pretend to be. do all of the things that she does. Um, in any of your official statements that you provide me with the findings of fact, you can't knowingly make a false report or a misleading statement. Um, and then you can't willfully neglect your duties in order to attain a benefit or deprive somebody else of a benefit. Um, and all those with the GM underneath it by statute, they're considered gross misdemeanors, which means it's a up to a hundred, up to 90 days in jail and up to a thousand dollar fine. The one on the bottom, just willfully neglecting to perform your duties, it's bad, but it's less bad. So it's just a misdemeanor, which is, excuse me, I take that back. Misdemeanor is 90 days and $1,000 fine. The gross misdemeanor, so the first top four are up to 365 days in jail and a $5,000 fine. And that's it. There's not much. Those are the resources that I was able to pull. And Clara has the links to those or can get you the hard copies. Any questions?

Thank you so much. Thank you for your presentation. I'm just curious. All of these rules, these are just for the Planning Commission to abide by? Or is this all county employees and the Planning Commission? As well.

And all volunteers, which is why it includes the planning commission. Okay. So employee, yeah, I forgot to say that at the beginning, but yeah. It's all the elected and offices and employees.

Yeah, wonderful. Yeah. Do any of my other fellow, oh, oh, I'm so sorry. Commissioner Bowen, please.

I was just curious. I've been wondering about this for a while. I have a business. I wanted to give some like product to my fellow planning commissioners. That's outside of these restrictions, right? To like bring a jar of peanut butter to share to demonstrate my business.

If it's, if you're not doing it to influence any decision and it's under the $50 per source per year, then it's fine. It's considered an employee to employee gift.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Anything else? All right. Are there any other questions for Lisa while we have her? None? Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. Oh, so sorry. Go ahead.

If a planning commissioner has a question about conflict of interest or OPMA, should they reach out to Clara, to DCD, or should they reach out to you?

It's better to go through Clara and then I can reach out.

Okay. And then second question, can you speak directly to the question that I had asked in the last meeting about quasi-judicial open space or should I ask Cecilia or Rafe or Scott?

Can you remind me what the question was?

It was is there a way to streamline that like other counties do or does it have to go through directly through the Planning Commission?

That's something we're working on, and I'm working with DCD on that.

Okay. I'll just ask DCD for an update on that next time.

Yeah.

Sounds good. Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you, Lisa. We appreciate it. All right. The next item on our agenda for this evening is going to be our public hearing on the 2026 Administrative Code Edits, presented by April Gassman, DCD Long Range Planner. And then she's here with Jim Rogers as well. Thank you. Welcome to you both. Thank you.

My presentation up here real quick. goes perfect okay um my name is april gasman i'm a long-range planner with dcd i'm going to be taking you through the 2026 administrative code updates before the public hearing So for the quick background, DCD attempts to do these administrative updates annually. Edits are intended to move quickly through the adoption process because they are not supposed to be substantive or change the intent of the current code. We also have two director's interpretations that we're including in this process. Director's interpretations are currently implemented and in Kitsap County Code 2104040, the county is directed to prioritize and include director's interpretations in the next applicable code update and that's why those two director's interpretations are a part of this project. So we're at the public hearing here today. SEPA comment period closed on the 10th. As far as I've checked in with Claire today, we have not received any comments through the SEPA comment period. The public comment period for the form also closed this afternoon, and we will get that comment matrix out to you as soon as possible. So here is the list of the administrative edits. The one change that we've made since you last saw these is we are no longer moving forward with the proposed removal of the master planning code. So that's still in here. It's in your documents that you received. We're not moving forward with that proposed change at this time. And the two directors' interpretations have impacts to three pieces of code. Um, since the last time we spoke, we shifted this co-living addition from, I think I originally had it with dorms. It is now going in boarding houses, rooming houses, lodging houses, or co-living based on how the definition in the RCW is written explicitly calls out boarding houses. So it makes more sense to put it here. The multiple family definition, adding in the side by side units. Grammar fix to this one. Another grammar fix to this one. Adding in a footnote, we're just rising it to the top of the table. This footnote was previously excluded from the table, but it is down below the table, so we just want to fix that. and this is no longer part of this project. This was supposed to be included, commercial uses was included in the comp plan, just didn't make it in, so we're just making sure that that's added in to reflect what is in the comp plan. This one is a math fix. This is a reference fix. The original reference was to, I think, a boat launch. The correct reference is actually to water oriented storage. Then the cell tower director's interpretation allowing for people to do leaseholds for cell towers on their properties that may not otherwise qualify. So that impacts two pieces of code here, 16-04-050. and this addition to 17-530-060A. The final director's interpretation is regarding existing non-conforming homes and adding in this interpretation that the applicant can replace the square footage of a mobile or a non-conforming mobile or not manufactured home under this section no greater than 10% in size of the original non-conforming structure, assuming that they meet the variance criteria noted up in the code previously. After today, deliberations of finding a fact will be July 21st with Jim. I will not be here. And yeah. Happy to answer any questions or get straight into the public here.

I do have a quick question. Would you just remind me, all of these items have been, would you just remind me some of the key stakeholders or maybe outside groups that have had just like an overview of these?

Yeah, so KBA was, we reached out to KBA regarding the master planning proposal removal of that. Obviously we're not moving forward with that piece here. The SEPA comment period went out at the end of May and closed on June 10th and we didn't receive any comments to that. So tribes are notified, local governments were notified of that. And then the comment period closed today at 4 p.m. for the comment form that we put out. So that was put out at the beginning of June and was a 15-day comment period. So that went out newspaper. It went out GovDelivery.

Yeah, wonderful. Thank you. I just wanted to have that fresh in my brain. Thank you so much. Do any of my other fellow planning commissioners have any high-level questions about process or anything for April and Jim before we begin? All righty. Please, Commissioner Fenner.

Yeah, so you say the SEPA went out. There was one you said that went out to a long list of stakeholders. Did these definitions go out as well for specifically the multifamily change in definition? Did you inquire of the KBA Builder Association on that?

I'm not sure about with SEPA. The SEPA Determination of Non-Significance went out and all the links were included to everything that you guys have been presented with. KBA, it's my understanding that they were not approached about the multiple family? No.

But I don't... You're talking about the definition? Was there a change?

The definition of the name, yeah, it expands to include side-by-side units, and it removed the designation for occupancy of three or four families.

Okay. Yeah. So my understanding is that's international building code. It makes those definitions for us. So we didn't have to change the definition just to put that in there. So there's no change.

There's no change?

Well, it's redlined, right? Well, yes. That's the change that we were proposing to add to the code. Right. But we didn't change the definition. of multifamily or single family.

I guess I'm not following. You changed the definition in the proposed document, right? It's on page eight of your presentation today. So that red line is a proposed change to the definition. Is that right?

Right. But that change is reflective of the International Building Code. It updates it to reflect that international building code.

I understand.

Okay.

Okay. Do we have any other questions or anything for April and Jim before we begin the public hearing? Please.

I just want to confirm. I know I might have misunderstood you earlier, but the 17-440, that's being removed on the list. and part of the matrix moving forward. Is that what I understand?

Yes, the project is, we are no longer including the proposed removal of the master planning code as a part of this project.

Okay, thank you.

POINT OF CLARIFICATION. IS THIS A TIME WHEN WE ASK ABOUT SPECIFICS OR ARE WE WAITING FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING?

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. OUR QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT SHOULD JUST BE VERY HIGH LEVEL OR ABOUT JUST GENERAL PROCESS, NOT ABOUT THE DETAILS OF IT. WE WOULD DO THAT IN OUR DELIBERATIONS IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE AFTER THIS PARTICULAR PROCESS. YEAH. ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? All righty. At this time, I will open the public hearing. When providing public testimony, please remember to state your name and the general area in which you live. I will now ask Clara to call the names listed on the public hearing sign-in sheet. And when you hear your name, please come forward when your name is called. And then after all of our in-person speakers have provided testimony, we'll then invite all of our virtual attendees who wish to offer their testimony. Thank you so much, Clara.

All right. First up, we have Cathy Lustig.

Hi, my name is Kathy Lustig and I live in Annatai in the area of East Bremerton. I'm particularly concerned to hear about any kind of math changes with regards to the tree canopy or to about SEPA. I only recently heard about some of these changes and And just realized, too, that for weeks that even though I've been signed up for the digest from all the different departments, that all of a sudden I'm not getting any at all. And I'm kind of concerned about that, why that happened. And maybe you all don't get them, but I did have notice, though, that a lot of times I wouldn't get them until after the fact. So... I think there's a communication problem with the public, and I particularly want to know about SEPA and about tree canopy things. So that's about all I wanted to say. Thanks.

Thank you for your comment, ma'am.

All right. And there's no other attendees or anyone? Sorry. There's nobody else who has signed up for the public hearing.

Is there anyone else that is present currently that would like to speak on record? Seeing none, we can move to our virtual attendees. We'll start with Joe. Please forgive me. Joe Lubbisher.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Joe Lubbisher, and I'm from Indianola. I have a question. and a comment. And the question is that in Ms. Gassman's presentation, she indicated that if code changes were substantive, that there was some other process that was to be used. And I would ask one of you commissioners to follow up and find out what that other process is. Thank you on that. So my comment is on the part of the tree ordinance 174950300, your item number eight, that gives an option for removing all trees from the property and planting three new elements of vegetation. And I think the basic perspective here is you're much better off retaining existing trees than trying to replace them, okay? And in that context, I find that this cut them all down and plant three little trees to be a bit of a joke, to be honest, but for two various serious reasons. Now, the first reason is somewhat general, and I want to make you all aware of this, is that over the last year, we've found that the county... currently really doesn't seem to have a process for tracking or enforcing hearing examiner decisions and conditions. I think this is a huge problem, but it relates to this ordinance in this way, and that's that This ordinance doesn't have any mechanism for enforcement, right? So first of all, there's no requirement for survivability, no definition of what a successful planting means over time. Secondly, there is no covenant to advise a new purchaser or a new owner of the property that they're supposed to keep these three trees growing and alive. Thirdly, There's no plan or requirement to correct problems if a tree dies, for example, and certainly no penalty involved if all three of them get cut down sometime in the future. And fourth, and this relates to my point about the county's ability to track, there's no requirement for inspection to verify and enforce this ordinance. So you're saying take down existing good trees, you can plant something, but we really aren't going to care if those plants survive in the long term. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment, sir. The next public testimony will be from April Ryan.

Hello, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Hello, I am April Ryan. I live in Kingston, Washington. I am also commenting on the Kitsap code update matrix, specifically number 8 regarding tree retention. As written, this tree retention ratio does not comply with no net loss and actually encourages the removal of all trees with simple one to one replacement by replanting non comparable trees. A new tree is not comparable to a mature 24 inch diameter tree by any standards and does not replace its ecosystem functions of cleaning air, providing shade, habitat, or water management. This section needs serious review by the Planning Commission. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment. Our next public testimony will be from Beverly Parsons.

Hello, I'm Beverly Parsons from Handsville in North Kitsap. I had expected that the code changes in the matrix would be updates that address the changes that were made in the comprehensive plan between 2016 and 2024. The first clue that something was amiss in the code changes came when I saw in the staff report that the vision statements that are quoted are from the 2016 comprehensive plan, not the 2024 comp plan. A particular note is that the 2024 vision statements emphasize more attention to local input, more meaningful engagement of residents, and improved ability to prepare for and adapt to population growth, economic shifts, climate change through environmental safeguards. Yet, when I look at the proposed changes, they seem to be missing attention to the vision statements in the 24 comp plan. For example, the proposal to remove code 17-440 on master planning. I realize you've changed that. goes in the wrong direction instead master planning needs to be strengthened and or addressed in regard to code seventeen four fifty on performance based development rather than removal of master planning currently the master plan Statement is optional. So, of course, it's not being used some new combination of codes is needed to strengthen assurance that local input is truly respected in decision making and the county is better establishing environmental safeguards for large developments at the early design stages. Without some change and to tighten up the performance-based development and doing something about master planning, we are going to encourage the continuation of major environmental problems like some of us are seeing around the county today. So I would encourage that although the changes that are being made may be helpful, the process is missing the big picture of the problems that are occurring with large-scale developments. I would also ask, does approving this set of code changes in effect cut off the possibility that these bigger picture issues reflected in Titles 16, 17, 21, and 22 will be addressed. So my emphasis overall is on code changes that ensure that more attention is given to environmental safeguards as called for in the 2024 comprehensive plan. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment. All right. And our next speaker will be Mr. William Palmer.

Can you hear me?

Yes, sir.

Okay, my question is for regard something that is not in the code edits, but should be and it should have been in code edits or in the code amendments that took place and and were adopted in 2022. And that has to do with the director's interpretation issued on March 20th in 2020, having to do with the mandatory minimum density requirement in urban low areas. Before that director's interpretation, there was no indication in code that said that you had to devolve to the minimum five units per acre. But in March of 2020, when nobody else was tracking anything, there was the director's interpretation issued. known about it in time i would have appealed it because it should have been considered a public hearing still should and i think the code edits today is a perfect opportunity to resurrect that director's interpretation issued in march of 2020 and have a discussion about it because the density complications that requires conflicts with the footnote 25 to the um I'm trying to think of the name of it. It has to do with density and dimensions. This code edit is incomplete without that director's interpretation added. That's the gist of my comments.

Thank you, Mr. Palmer. I have one more speaker online, Marla Powers.

Hi there. My name is Marla Powers. I am an environmental planner for the Port Gamble Squallam tribe. And I just wanted to make a couple of comments about the tree canopy changes. I know these are minor changes and I support and thank you for adding commercial applicability to the tree retention requirements. I too would like to look at the bigger picture for trees, tree canopies for Kitsap County, mostly to encourage protection of mature trees. I would ask maybe the planning commission or the tribe could ask directly for a tree canopy audit for review beginning January, 2027. So we can see how one year of the tree code has been in effect and how we could potentially modify or make changes that would make it more effective. Thank you very much.

Thank you for your comment. I'm seeing no more comments online. I'd like to open up one more time to the room. Seeing none. If there are no more additional speakers, I will close our public hearing on the 2026 Administrative Code updates. Thank you so much, April and Jim, for your time this evening and for the presentation. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Our next item up is a briefing on the stormwater design manual and Title 12 code updates presented by Cecilia Olson, DCD Assistant Director, Brie Ellis, DCD Development Engineering Manager, and Garrett Ballou, DCD Long Range Planner. Got a powerhouse team tonight.

It'll be just one moment while we get our presentation set up. Okay, now we're ready. Thanks for your patience. My name is Cecilia Olson. I'm an assistant director with DCD. I'm joined today by Brie Ellis, our DE program manager, and Garrett with Long Range, but he did spend some time with us in DE, too. So we are excited to be presenting to you a briefing on some upcoming code changes to Kitsap County Code Title 12, as well as an update to our stormwater design manual. So why are we updating it? I like to explain it as a Russian doll, where at the federal level in 1972, The federal government enacted the Clean Water Act, which essentially says that you can't discharge pollutants to bodies of water without it being authorized. And so out of that was born the NPDES permitting system, which is National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The authority for that at the state level has been delegated to the Department of Ecology. So they do all the permitting for that, which includes industrial permits, construction permits, and then our municipal permits as well, which is for any local jurisdiction that owns operates and maintains a stormwater system. So the system of pipes, catch basins, um, big ponds that you might see off the side of the road that are publicly maintained that requires a permit through the state. And within that permit, there are specific obligations that the county has, uh, public works as the permit holder, technically. And there are portions of that permit requirement that are delegated to DCD in reviewing development and redevelopment projects for compliance with Ecology's own stormwater manual. And there are two different manuals at the state level, one's for western Washington, which is what we follow. So there was a new permit in 2024 for NPDES. We are a phase two permittee, if you're familiar at all. The larger jurisdictions are phase one, so they're on kind of a different timeline and have more requirements. But here in Kitsap, we are a phase two permittee. So our new permit was issued in 2024, and it requires us to adopt all of the changes to the ecology manual by June 30th of 2027. So with this project, we're obviously going to look at making changes to our standards within the manual to align with any changes that Ecology has made with their manual. We're also looking to modernize and streamline, clarify things within our Title 12 code. And then looking for opportunities to improve the SDAP process with that by clarifying specific procedures within code, looking at the duration of permit approval, if that makes sense. There was a case a few years back that clarified specific limitations to stormwater vesting that we will need to evaluate with our approval duration on SDAPs. And there are additional things that we'll be looking at with code updates and manual updates that ideally will make everything really clear internally and externally. So our plan for outreach with this is we'll be putting together a technical advisory group. with local engineers and development professionals. We will send out a survey here at the end of this month, beginning of next month, to gauge interest and level of familiarity with our stormwater manual. We will go through public engagement with reaching out and doing our presentations with the KBA, community advisory councils, going through the standard public comment periods. And then we will also have some coordination with some of our public works counterparts in stormwater roads, sewer, and solid waste. Surprisingly, there are factors of our standards that affect each of those departments or divisions. And we also have plans to coordinate with the tribes with this update. And with that, our desired outcome is we're really looking at all of our policies, goals, strategies within the comp plan to ensure that our stormwater code is aligned with those, always protecting water quality, and then improving the permitting process with SDAPs and even building permit review, the predictability and efficiency of that by having really clear codes. Currently, we are in the process of executing a contract with a consultant that will be helping with this. And there is an internal gap analysis that's been performed as well as a gap analysis that a public works consultant is completing currently. And then we'll have our technical advisory group outreach and meeting this summer. We'll start our drafting in the fall and all of our agency coordination. We may be back here in the fall to do a work study with you guys, depending on what material we have at that time. And then early 2027, ideally, we will have our SEPA public comment period open, our hearings to allow for additional public comment. And then we are doing... We actually have a great feature with our manual where it was built with a... It's a help authoring tool software is what it's called. And our IS is going to be doing that development for us. It makes it really easy to use and search. And so that, once we have our drafts, IS will be working on that for us. And then we're hoping that we can adopt in the spring before the deadline of June 30th. And there may be additional outreach that's part of that. Actually, there likely will be. And then implementation with staff, updating our publications, application materials, things like that. Can we answer any questions at this time? It's a very high level briefing for you guys, but it would be great to get any comments or questions at this time going into our project kickoff. Please.

Can you speak a little more to the beginning of your presentation when you mentioned SDAP and project vesting and how it relates to stormwater code?

Yeah, so within our NPDES permit, it has to deal with, I don't remember the exact years, but there are like five-year periods where if we approve and issue a permit, it actually has to start construction by a certain time frame. Otherwise, it loses its vesting to the current stormwater code. And I can verify exactly what those dates are. But they have a definition of started construction where it's basically at final grade with utilities installed. It's not just trees have come down. And I believe the current permit, the cutoff is going to be 2027. I'm not sure, though. I can get back to you on that. I don't have the specific dates.

It'll be interesting to learn more. It looks like it'll be a long process, so I'm interested to hear more.

Yeah, absolutely.

Thank you for your presentation.

Of course. Do any of my fellow commissioners have any questions or comments for Cecilia or her team? All right. I'm seeing none. You just did that great of a job. Oh, so sorry. Commissioner Vliet actually does apologize.

Yeah, really quickly. Sorry about that. That was the late one. Thank you for the nice presentation. Looking forward to seeing more of this. Can you speak more to how green infrastructure might play into this with regards to stormwater retention, low impact development?

Yeah, so that is already built within our stormwater manual. There is a list of basically prescriptive BMPs, depending on what triggers a development project has. So if it's a small project, as we currently call it, where somebody is building a single family residence, there are prescriptive options for how they could mitigate for rooftops and driveways that already fit into that low impact development green infrastructure. So there are, I don't know, I guess we can see too if you would like us to do additional research into how we can expand on it, but LID BMPs were adopted into our code I think in 2012.

Okay. Thank you very much. Yeah. I'll look into that some more. Please.

Out of curiosity, does the Washington DOE provide training to municipalities or to your staff on, you know, as stormwater manual? I mean, it was updated in 2024, but do they provide that to you guys or do you have to seek that out individually or?

Not readily available. It's basically maybe while they are going through the process, but what is available to our staff is essentially what is available to the public. And you do kind of have to hunt and peck a little bit, but there's crosswalks that they offer to show what the changes are from the previous manual. Is there something more specific that you're thinking?

No, I was just hoping that... there's a lot of material that goes into it. I was hoping that they would be able to provide it to the municipalities of updates and be able to show applicability to your county.

Something that's actually a really useful resource is they publish their response to comments that they receive as part of their manual. If you're familiar with where to find it online, you can use their search feature for keywords and some of the, results that it will return include those response to comments where the public or, you know, maybe some engineers wanted to clarify a certain section of that manual and you can see what their intent was. Yeah.

Awesome.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Who's the consultant you hired to assist in the process?

I don't know if we can say at this time since we have not fully executed the contract, but I would be happy to let you know as soon as that is done.

Are there any other questions, comments, burning desires? All right. Thank you so, so much. THIS WILL BRING US TO OUR SECOND AND FINAL GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. I WANT TO REMIND THE PUBLIC THAT THIS IS TRULY JUST A COMMENT PERIOD. WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND THE STAFF, WE'RE NOT ABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. DO WE HAVE ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IN THE ROOM? SEEING NONE, AND WE DO HAVE ONLINE, JOE, PLEASE.

Thank you, Joe Lubescher from Indianola. Over the last three years, we've had some serious stormwater failures on construction sites. The one I know personally is Arborwood, south of Kingston. Other people have identified problems with the cottages near Island Lake. And I'm going to take a guess that you're probably all aware of the two months of failures at Royal Valley off State Route 303. So I would like to find a way to ensure that this issue of enforcing BMPs on construction sites is on the table at the very beginning of this process. And related to that, I think your question about who's the technical experts you're bringing in is really important. And I think we need to bring in somebody or a firm with PhD level of expertise in stormwater and preferably with experience at the state level. I can certainly make one suggestion there, and I've... Already got an email off to Miss Olson on these points. And just let me emphasize again this enforcement of BMPs at the Arborwood site. We had some rains, not unusual in early January, but heavy rains. And two weekends in a row, The contractor wasn't even on site and the site was running heavily with mud and undermining silt fences and overtopping the one little retention pond. So there's something really basic that's been missing in the process and we need to ensure that gets corrected. Thank you.

Thank you for your comment, sir. I'm seeing no more comments online. I'd like to open up one more time to the room. I see none. There are no additional speakers. I will now close the final general public comment period. We now move. Would you like to provide? You're welcome to come provide public comment, ma'am. You're OK.

And my name's Kathy Lustig, and I'm in East Bremerton. The one thing that I noticed in the presentation that concerns me is talking about bringing professionals in and having certain... Ma'am, just really quick, I just want you to know your comment here will not be reflected on the public hearing.

This is truly just like... The stormwater. It's about the stormwater. Oh, I apologize.

Okay, I apologize. My concern is the public outreach. It didn't seem like there was very much there. And that's a concern for me is that the general lay people out in the community aren't really allowed to have any input. That was it.

Thank you so much. I apologize about the confusion. Thank you so much. All right. I will now formally close the second general public comment period. We are now going to move forward to the R for the good of the order portion. Do any of my commissioners have any comments that they wish to share? Please, Commissioner.

Yeah, I just I don't know if anybody out there is like me, but I've caught a World Cup fever and which is a good fever to have. And so I just want to give kudos to I know we do deal mostly with the county staff, but unincorporated. But the city of Bremerton is putting on a really good show there on Quincy Square. I attended the other day. They're going to have, I think, eight more opportunities for fan days there. I suggest you take them in. And then also I think Mike Wallace Park in Kingston is going to have one to watch the USA Men this Friday as well. So thanks to the county, it's been a really fun activity to see all those food trucks and see everybody out and about, and the weather has certainly been cooperating.

I second that. Thank you so much, Commissioner Bleat. Commissioner Fenner, please.

I'll third that. I was there. It was a lot of fun.

Yeah. Kudos, City of Bram. Kudos, County. It's awesome to have that so local. Is there anything else from my fellow planning commissioners before I let you guys all enjoy the sunshine? All right. If there are no other items for tonight's meeting, I declare this meeting adjourned at 6.35 p.m. Please note that our July 7, 2026 Planning Commission meeting will be canceled. The next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for July 21, 2026. Thank you, everyone. Have a great night.