OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Bainbridge Island, Washington/Planning Commission
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Bainbridge Island Planning Commission Regular Meeting — September 24, 2026

Planning Commission — Thursday, September 24, 2026
BodyBainbridge Island, Washington
SessionPlanning Commission
DateThursday, September 24, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 52:28

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:05

We'll pause for one moment for technical confirmation.

0:12

And then Renee, do we have anyone set up to sign up to speak?

0:17

Yep, so I can sorry, just to jump in.

0:20

I can see the live feed now.

0:21

Uh separate from our meeting.

0:24

All right.

0:24

Thank you very much.

0:25

We're back online.

0:30

All right, in streaming video.

0:32

So next item four on our agenda, public comment.

0:37

Members of the public are encouraged to submit written public comment to the planning commission at any time by emailing PCD at BainbridgeWA.gov.

0:45

Members of the public who wish to provide public comment in person at a planning commission meeting should sign up to speak on the sign-in sheet by the chamber doors.

0:55

The planning commission chair will call the people signed up on the sign-in sheet.

0:59

And speakers will have up to three minutes to speak from the podium.

1:02

Please speak directly into the microphone, which is adjustable.

1:05

A timer on the screen will indicate when three minutes or such other time as set by the chair has elapsed.

1:12

Orderly behavior and civility and remarks is expected with no clapping or booing and no yielding of one person's time to another person.

1:19

Guidelines for public comment are provided.

1:21

Remote public comment is allowed with advanced notice to the planning and community development department by noon on the day of the meeting at PCD at BainbridgeWa.gov, provided that all remote commenters shall be required to display their true name and to keep their camera turned on to show their true uncovered face while delivering their comments.

1:40

Public comment is not accepted during the balance of the plan and commission meeting unless a public hearing or public participation meeting is on the agenda.

1:49

All right.

1:50

Yeah, we don't have any public comment.

1:54

So would anyone in the audience who doesn't signed up wish to comment?

1:59

If not, we'll move on to the planning director's report.

2:06

Interim Director Terrell, are you with us and able to provide a report?

2:12

I am, but that did remind me of the joke about how Zoom meetings are like seances.

2:18

I think someone's trying to join.

2:19

Hear you, can you hear me?

2:21

Um anyway, yes, hello.

2:23

I couldn't tell if there's anybody at the podium, so I didn't want to start speaking when a member of the public was just about to.

2:29

Okay.

2:30

I have, I hope, a brief but useful report uh today.

2:36

Council meeting went very long on uh Tuesday and covered a lot of ground for us.

2:42

The important part is that the LMN strategic uh economics and EA and the environmental engineers contract amendment number three was approved, just over $307,000, bringing our total comp plans so far up to about 1.4 million.

3:02

It's huge.

3:04

Uh of that, 49,000 was to cover work that has been performed but not yet paid.

3:10

And another almost 100,000 work for was for contingency work in the event that we need an SCIS for the comp plan.

3:18

For anybody in the audience, that's a supplemental environmental impact statement.

3:22

We did a draft environmental impact statement that provided some preferred alternatives.

3:27

And now we are looking to make sure that all of those impacts are covered for the most recent version of the comp plan that's been approved.

3:36

I asked the consultants to please review.

3:40

Um this is item number two, by the way.

3:42

I asked them to review the February land capacity analysis with the mandatory inclusionary zoning uh assumptions for the SEIS work.

3:56

And so far, it's it's been fairly interesting in terms of residential.

4:03

It looks like we're okay.

4:04

We've we've covered those impacts, even though we moved some of them around, change heights and stuff.

4:09

Uh, the only area that we are unsure of is transportation.

4:13

So Farrin Pears is the transportation consultant working on that.

4:17

Uh, we have asked them to review for whether or not there are transportation impacts because again, once you move stuff around, you move intersection impacts around.

4:26

Suddenly you have to rethink.

4:29

Uh they will provide us with their opinion on it around October 1st.

4:35

After this agenda went out, um, but obviously for tonight, we had the initial um LCA, the land capacity analysis for September with and without a mandatory inclusionary zoning.

4:51

And we have found that in both cases we can meet our buildable lands residential targets finally.

5:11

But I can't, I could not get that to the council, and I couldn't get it to you because of the it came in on Saturday after we had already published the agenda.

5:19

Unfortunately, the council will not meet for the next two potential meeting dates and won't see us again until October 13th.

5:26

Yes, they have canceled the 29th meeting as they often do because it was like the fifth Tuesday, and then they canceled the first meeting of the month too before I had an opportunity to speak at the council meeting.

5:38

It was part of the consent agenda.

5:41

So I have asked the executive to take a good hard look at our rules and see how that information can be conveyed ahead of time, and if not ahead of time, then we will have to wait until the 13th.

5:53

The one thing is that with the mandatory inclusionary zoning assumptions, it created paradoxically far more jobs.

6:02

We have no idea.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Zoning Regulations████████████████████████████████32%
Procedural██████████10%
Comprehensive Planning██████████10%
Affordable Housing█████████9%
Land Use Planning███████7%
Environmental Protection███████7%
Mixed Use Development███████7%
Transgender Awareness█████5%
Design Standards████4%
Summary of Proceedings

Bainbridge Island Planning Commission Regular Meeting — September 24, 2026

The Bainbridge Island Planning Commission met on Thursday, September 24, 2026, at 6:00 PM in Council Chambers at 280 Madison Ave N, Bainbridge Island, WA, and remotely via Zoom. The commission received the Interim Planning Director's report, unanimously recommended the 2027-2028 Planning Commission Work Plan to the City Council, and unanimously recommended approval of two administrative departure requests for the Blackberries Short Plat. The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:57 PM, about 55 minutes ahead of schedule.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • No members of the public signed up to speak, and no one in the audience indicated a wish to comment. Public comment closed with no testimony offered.

Planning Director's Report

  • Interim Planning Director Emily Terrell reported that the City Council approved Contract Amendment #3 with LMN Strategic Economics and EA and the environmental engineers for just over $307,000, bringing total Comprehensive Plan consultant costs to approximately $1.4 million. Of that amount, $49,000 covers work performed but not yet paid, and nearly $100,000 is contingency in the event a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) is needed.
  • Consultants reviewed the February land capacity analysis (LCA) incorporating mandatory inclusionary zoning assumptions for the SEIS work. Residential impacts appear covered; transportation remains the only uncertain area, with transportation consultant Farrin Pears expected to provide an opinion around October 1.
  • The September LCA, with and without mandatory inclusionary zoning, shows the city can meet its buildable lands residential targets in both cases. However, the results arrived after the agenda was published and could not be formally presented; the City Council will not meet again until October 13 (the September 29 and early October meetings were canceled).
  • Consultants lean 80–90% toward the conclusion that an SEIS may not be required, potentially saving about six months. In response to a commissioner's question, Director Terrell clarified that the Final EIS (FEIS) is absolutely necessary regardless; the open question is whether a six-month SEIS detour occurs before completing the FEIS.
  • Vice Chair Blossom identified an error in the Winslow plan mapping: parcels previously approved by the commission were omitted from the map and model. Staff's internal review suggests the omission involves roughly 10 residential units and is unlikely to affect the SEIS; the time cost of re-running the model is unknown, and the consultant is on vacation until the following week.

Discussion Items — 2027-2028 Planning Commission Work Plan

  • The commission discussed priority scores, noting that the voluntary and mandatory inclusionary zoning line items and the form-based codes for middle housing each scored 26. Members generally agreed not to over-segment priorities, and that sequencing should be guided by council priorities, available resources, and level of effort. Low-scoring items should remain in the backlog rather than be dropped.
  • Commissioner Peter moved to recommend the 2027-2028 Planning Commission Work Plan to the City Council for approval; Commissioner Ben seconded. The commission emphasized that the recommendation seeks council input and feedback on priorities.
  • The motion passed unanimously with no opposition. One commissioner noted this was the first time the commission had developed and presented a work plan to council in their six years on the commission.

Discussion Items — Blackberries Short Plat Administrative Departure Requests

  • Planner Victoria Lewelling, the city's project manager, presented two administrative departure requests for the Blackberries Short Plat, located north of Wyatt Way and west of Madison Avenue in R 4.3 zoning. The first departure would allow buildings greater than 1,600 square feet to be attached with a zero lot line setback from building to home site boundary, affecting the two southern lots. The second would allow the same model and elevation to be built next to each other, affecting three lots. The existing two-lot plat (single-family home and garage) would become a four-lot plat.
  • Applicant Charlie Winslow described the project as a "micro community" providing missing-middle, small-footprint housing near the Winslow town center: six similar units (three primary residences with attached ADUs) plus a single-family house at the rear where the owner will reside. He argued the departures improve the layout by eliminating unusable six-foot building separations, creating green space along a new pedestrian path, protecting two existing trees, and improving energy efficiency through attached construction. He noted the site sits at the edge of the mixed-use town center adjacent to attached housing such as Grow Community, and that a five-foot hedge would screen the street frontage.
  • In response to commissioner questions, Mr. Winslow stated the units could be sold individually, including the ADUs, through a condominium structure; that the units have the potential to serve as teacher housing but involve no formal commitment to the affordable housing program; and that the R-4 zoning permits only four lots, and administrative departures cannot be used to change underlying density.
  • Vice Chair Blossom expressed concern that the departures do not strictly comply with the purpose and intent of the departure criteria and that the staff report's justification is "a bit of a stretch." She nonetheless supported the request, citing that the parcel was specifically in mind when the connection zone boundary was adjusted (had that change occurred, the subdivision code would not apply), that the original intent of the 1,600-square-foot threshold was to incentivize small homes, and that the applicant's proposal results in a better subdivision. She suggested the code may need amendment to provide a pathway for such development in the future.
  • Commissioner Alex supported the proposal as a pragmatic approach, noting the property is caddy cornered to the core district and across from Grove Avenue, and that retaining single-family housing at the rear responds to the existing R 4.3 neighborhood.
  • A motion to recommend that the Planning Director approve both administrative departure requests passed unanimously. Commissioner Dynas recused himself from this item due to a conflict of interest.

Good of the Order

  • Director Terrell noted that state law requires the city to adopt the "unit lot subdivision" process within a couple of years, presenting an opportunity to revise the subdivision code so this type of development does not require departures. She also stated that, as part of ordinance 202605, the commission will receive the full list of state-mandated requirements due through the current GMA compliance declaration in the coming months, with unit lot subdivisions and child care centers as the two longer-horizon items.
  • Commissioner John, the newest commission member, shared a point of personal privilege: the first message he received in his official mailbox contained a direct and gratuitous reference to his sexual orientation. He stated that he is a gay man and proud of that fact, that such remarks hurt and have no place in the city's public life, and that he accepted the sender's immediate apology. He urged everyone to choose words carefully, observing that having the right to use hurtful epithets does not make it right or productive.

Key Outcomes

  • The commission unanimously recommended the 2027-2028 Planning Commission Work Plan to the City Council for approval with feedback.
  • The commission unanimously recommended that the Planning Director approve both administrative departure requests for the Blackberries Short Plat (Commissioner Dynas recused).
  • No public comment was received.
  • The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:57 PM, about 55 minutes early.

Meeting Transcript

We'll pause for one moment for technical confirmation. And then Renee, do we have anyone set up to sign up to speak? Yep, so I can sorry, just to jump in. I can see the live feed now. Uh separate from our meeting. All right. Thank you very much. We're back online. All right, in streaming video. So next item four on our agenda, public comment. Members of the public are encouraged to submit written public comment to the planning commission at any time by emailing PCD at BainbridgeWA.gov. Members of the public who wish to provide public comment in person at a planning commission meeting should sign up to speak on the sign-in sheet by the chamber doors. The planning commission chair will call the people signed up on the sign-in sheet. And speakers will have up to three minutes to speak from the podium. Please speak directly into the microphone, which is adjustable. A timer on the screen will indicate when three minutes or such other time as set by the chair has elapsed. Orderly behavior and civility and remarks is expected with no clapping or booing and no yielding of one person's time to another person. Guidelines for public comment are provided. Remote public comment is allowed with advanced notice to the planning and community development department by noon on the day of the meeting at PCD at BainbridgeWa.gov, provided that all remote commenters shall be required to display their true name and to keep their camera turned on to show their true uncovered face while delivering their comments. Public comment is not accepted during the balance of the plan and commission meeting unless a public hearing or public participation meeting is on the agenda. All right. Yeah, we don't have any public comment. So would anyone in the audience who doesn't signed up wish to comment? If not, we'll move on to the planning director's report. Interim Director Terrell, are you with us and able to provide a report? I am, but that did remind me of the joke about how Zoom meetings are like seances. I think someone's trying to join. Hear you, can you hear me? Um anyway, yes, hello. I couldn't tell if there's anybody at the podium, so I didn't want to start speaking when a member of the public was just about to. Okay. I have, I hope, a brief but useful report uh today. Council meeting went very long on uh Tuesday and covered a lot of ground for us. The important part is that the LMN strategic uh economics and EA and the environmental engineers contract amendment number three was approved, just over $307,000, bringing our total comp plans so far up to about 1.4 million. It's huge. Uh of that, 49,000 was to cover work that has been performed but not yet paid. And another almost 100,000 work for was for contingency work in the event that we need an SCIS for the comp plan. For anybody in the audience, that's a supplemental environmental impact statement. We did a draft environmental impact statement that provided some preferred alternatives. And now we are looking to make sure that all of those impacts are covered for the most recent version of the comp plan that's been approved. I asked the consultants to please review. Um this is item number two, by the way. I asked them to review the February land capacity analysis with the mandatory inclusionary zoning uh assumptions for the SEIS work. And so far, it's it's been fairly interesting in terms of residential. It looks like we're okay. We've we've covered those impacts, even though we moved some of them around, change heights and stuff. Uh, the only area that we are unsure of is transportation. So Farrin Pears is the transportation consultant working on that. Uh, we have asked them to review for whether or not there are transportation impacts because again, once you move stuff around, you move intersection impacts around. Suddenly you have to rethink.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com