Chapter 19.09 REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS

Chapter 19.09
REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS

Sections:

19.09.010 Application review criteria.

19.09.020 Application review classification.

19.09.030 Type I administrative review of applications.

19.09.040 Type II administrative review of applications.

19.09.050 Type III quasi-judicial review of applications.

19.09.060 Legislative review of applications.

19.09.070 Procedures for public hearings.

19.09.080 Procedures for closed record decisions and appeals.

19.09.090 Notice of final decision.

19.09.100 Official case record.

19.09.010 Application review criteria.

Review of an application and proposed development shall be governed by and be consistent with the fundamental land use planning policies and choices which have been made in the city’s adopted comprehensive plans and development regulations. The review process shall consider the type of land use permitted at the proposed site, the density and intensity of the proposed development, the infrastructure available and needed to serve the development, the character of the development and its consistency with the comprehensive plan and development regulations. In the absence of applicable development regulations, the applicable development criteria in the comprehensive plan or subarea plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW shall be determinative. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.020 Application review classification.

(a) Following the issuance of a determination of completeness and a notice of application, an application shall be reviewed at one of four levels:

(1) Type I administrative review;

(2) Type II administrative review;

(3) Type III quasi-judicial review;

(4) Legislative review.

(b) If this title or this code provides that a proposed development is subject to a specific type of review, or a different review procedure is required by law, then the application for such development shall be processed and reviewed accordingly. If this title does not provide for a specific type of review, or if a different review procedure is not required by law, then the city shall determine the type of review to be used for the type and intensity of the proposed development.

(c) Any public meeting or required open public hearing may be combined by the city with any public meeting or open record public hearing that may be held on the proposed development by another local, state, federal or other agency. Hearings shall be combined if requested by the applicant. However, joint hearings must be held within the city and within the time limits of this title and Chapter 36.70B RCW. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.030 Type I administrative review of applications.

Type I administrative review shall be used when the proposed development is subject to clear, objective and nondiscretionary standards that require the exercise of professional judgment about technical issues and the proposed development is categorically exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Permits reviewed through this process are not subject to the requirements of Chapter 19.07. The city may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. The decision of the city is final unless an administrative appeal process is provided for in this or any other title within this code. This type of review includes, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Interpretation of codes and ordinances;

(b) Single-family and other minor building permits not subject to environmental review;

(d) Boundary line adjustments;

(e) Fill and grade permits;

(f) Encroachment permits to work within a right-of-way;

(g) Flood development permits; and

(h) Minor amendments or modifications to approved developments or permits which may affect the precise dimensions or location of buildings, accessory structures and driveways, but do not affect the overall project character, increase the number of lots, dwelling units or density, or decrease the quality or amount of open space. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.040 Type II administrative review of applications.

(a) Type II administrative review shall be used when the proposed development is subject to objective and subjective standards that require the exercise of limited discretion about nontechnical issues and about which there may be limited public interest. The proposed development may or may not be subject to SEPA review. This type of review includes, but is not limited to, the following:

(1) Short subdivisions;

(2) Binding site plans; and

(3) Multifamily, commercial, industrial and/or office building permits that are subject to environmental review pursuant to Title 14 and the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).

(b) The review procedure under Type II administrative review includes the following:

(1) If the proposed development is subject to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the threshold determination may be made concurrent with the public comment period required in the notice of application, pursuant to the provisions of WAC 197-11-355, “Optional DNS,” and Chapter 13.04.

(2) The city may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application after the date the application is accepted as complete, and upon completion of the public comment period and the comment period required by SEPA, if applicable. The decision of the city is final unless an administrative appeal process is provided for in this or any other title within this code. The city shall mail the notice of decision to the applicant and all parties of record. The decision shall be issued pursuant to Section 19.09.090, Notice of final decision. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.050 Type III quasi-judicial review of applications.

(a) Type III quasi-judicial review shall be used when the development or use proposed under the application requires a public hearing before a hearing body which will generally be the hearing examiner. This type of review includes, but is not limited to, the following:

(1) Administrative appeals, including those relating to Chapter 43.21C RCW;

(2) Preliminary subdivisions;

(3) Plat alterations and/or vacations;

(4) Conditional use permits;

(5) Planned developments;

(6) Variances;

(7) Rezones which are not of general applicability; and

(8) Other similar development permit applications.

(b) The review procedure under Type III quasi-judicial review includes the following:

(1) A Type III quasi-judicial review process requires an open record public hearing before the appropriate hearing body which is generally the hearing examiner.

(2) The public hearing shall be held after the completion of the public comment period and the comment period required by SEPA, if applicable.

(3) At least ten days before the date of a public hearing, the city shall issue public notice of the date, time, location and purpose of the hearing, pursuant to Section 19.07.080.

(4) At least seven days before the date of the public hearing, the city shall issue a written staff report, integrating the SEPA review and threshold determination and recommendation regarding the application(s), shall make available to the public a copy of the staff report for review and inspection, and shall mail a copy of the staff report and recommendation to the applicant or the applicant’s designated representative. The city shall make available a copy of the staff report, subject to payment of a reasonable charge, to other parties who request it.

(5) Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the rules of procedure adopted by the hearing body. Lacking any adopted hearing procedures, the provisions of Section 19.09.070 shall be used to conduct the public hearing. A public hearing shall be recorded on either audio or audio-visual tape.

(6) Within ten working days after the date the public record closes, the hearing body shall issue a written decision regarding the application(s).

(7) The hearing body may approve, approve with conditions or deny the application and shall mail the notice of its decision to the city, applicant, the applicant’s designated representative, the property owner(s), and any other parties of record. The decision shall be issued pursuant to Section 19.09.090, Notice of final decision. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.060 Legislative review of applications.

(a) Legislative review is used when the proposed development involves the creation, implementation or amendment of city policy or law. Projects reviewed through this process are not subject to the requirements of Chapter 19.07. This type of review includes, but is not limited to, comprehensive plan, subarea plan, zoning and/or development code reviews, amendments and updates.

(b) Legislative review may include any or all of the following as is appropriate under the circumstances:

(1) Legislative review generally requires at least one public hearing before the planning commission, one public meeting before the city council, and in most instances will involve at least one public hearing before the city council.

(2) When an application by a private individual is part of the proposed legislative action, the application shall contain all information and material requirements, including the appropriate fee(s), required by the appropriate application form and any formal preapplication meeting.

(3) At least ten days before the date of the first planning commission hearing the city shall issue public notice of the date, time, location and purpose of the hearing pursuant to Section 19.07.080. The notice shall include notice of the SEPA threshold determination issued by the city.

(4) At least seven days prior to the hearing the city shall issue a written staff report, integrating the SEPA review and threshold determination and recommendation regarding the application(s), shall make available to the public a copy of the staff report for review and inspection, and shall mail a copy of the staff report and recommendation to the applicant or the applicant’s designated representative and planning commission members. The city shall make available a copy of the staff report, subject to a reasonable charge, to other persons who request it.

(5) Following the public hearing of the planning commission, in accordance with Chapter 35A.63 RCW, a recommendation of the planning commission shall be forwarded to the city council at the next regularly scheduled meeting. Upon receiving the recommendation from the planning commission, the city council shall set a public meeting to consider the proposal, at which they may either accept or reject the recommendation.

(6) The council must hold a public hearing to consider any changes to the recommendation of the planning commission. The council may approve, approve with conditions, deny or remand the proposal back to the planning commission for further review after such public hearing.

(7) In the event the city council determines that the public hearing record of the planning commission is insufficient or otherwise flawed, the council may remand the matter back to the planning commission to correct the deficiencies. The council shall specify the items or issues to be considered and the time frame for completing the additional work.

(8) The final decision of the council shall be by ordinance, resolution or motion, as appropriate. Where the final decision of the council is made by motion, it shall be in writing and shall include those items described in Section 19.09.090. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.070 Procedures for public hearings.

Public hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the hearing body’s rules of procedure and shall serve to create or supplement an evidentiary record upon which the body will base its decision. The public hearing shall be declared open and, in general, the following sequence of events shall be observed:

(a) Staff presentation, including submittal of any administrative reports. The hearing body may ask questions of the staff.

(b) Applicant presentation, including submittal of any materials. The hearing body may ask questions of the applicant.

(c) Testimony or comments by the public germane to the matter. Questions directed to the staff or the applicant shall be posed by the hearing body at its discretion.

(d) Rebuttal, response or clarifying statements by the staff and the applicant.

(e) The evidentiary portion of the public hearing shall be closed and, where applicable, the hearing body shall deliberate on the matter before it. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.080 Procedures for closed record decisions and appeals.

(a) Closed record decisions and appeals shall be conducted in accordance with the hearing body’s rules of procedure as provided for public hearings, and shall serve to provide argument and guidance for the body’s decision.

(b) Closed record decisions on requests for final plat approval of a preliminary subdivision shall include the following recommendations for approval or disapproval:

(1) A recommendation from the city water and sewer department as to the adequacy of the proposed means of sewage disposal and water supply;

(2) A recommendation from the city as to the compliance with all terms of the preliminary approval of the proposed subdivision; and

(3) A recommendation of approval or disapproval from the city engineer.

(c) Upon review of the request for final plat approval of a preliminary subdivision, the hearing body shall approve, disapprove or remand the final plat to the applicant with specific instructions for compliance with the preliminary subdivision approval.

(d) For closed record appeal hearings, no new evidence or testimony shall be given or received, except that the parties to an appeal may submit timely written statements or arguments. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.090 Notice of final decision.

(a) The city will strive to issue a written notice of final decision on an application reviewed pursuant to either a Type II administrative or a Type III quasi-judicial review process within one hundred twenty days after the date of the determination of completeness. In determining the number of days that have elapsed, the following periods shall be excluded:

(1) Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the city to correct plans, perform required studies, or provide additional information or materials. The period shall be calculated from the date the city issues the request to the applicant, to the earlier of the date the city determines whether the additional information satisfies its request or fourteen days after the date the information has been received by the city.

(2) If the city determines the information submitted by the applicant under subsection (a)(1) of this section is insufficient, it shall again notify the applicant of deficiencies and the procedures under subsection (a)(1) of this section shall apply to the request for information.

(3) Any period during which an environmental impact statement (EIS) is being prepared following a determination of significance pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW.

(4) Any period for administrative appeals, which shall not exceed ninety days for open record appeals and sixty days for closed record appeals.

(5) Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city.

(b) The time limit by which the city will strive to issue a written notice of final decision does not apply if an application:

(1) Requires an amendment to a comprehensive plan or development regulation.

(2) Requires the siting of an essential public facility, as provided in Chapter 36.70A RCW and as may be hereafter amended.

(3) Is substantially revised by the applicant after a determination of completeness has been issued, in which case the time period shall start from the date on which the revised project application is determined to be complete.

(c) If the city is unable to issue its final decision within the time limits provided for in this section, it shall provide written notice of this fact to the applicant. The notice shall include a statement of reasons why the time limits have not been met and an estimated date for issuance of the notice of final decision.

(d) In accordance with state law, the city is not liable for damages which may result from the failure to issue a timely notice of final decision.

(e) The written notice of final decision for Type II administrative decisions, Type III quasi-judicial decisions and legislative actions made by motion of the city shall include the following information:

(1) A statement of the findings of the review authority, stating the application’s compliance or noncompliance with each applicable criterion, and assurance of compliance with applicable standards.

(2) The decision to approve or deny the application and, if approved, conditions of approval necessary to ensure the proposed development will comply with all applicable laws.

(3) A statement that the decision is final unless appealed as provided in Chapter 19.11, Appeals. The statement shall state the appeal closing date and describe how a party may appeal the decision, including applicable fees and the elements of a notice of appeal.

(4) A written notice of decision rendered by the city council may be in the form of the signed ordinance or resolution.

(f) Effective Date. The final decision of the council or hearing body shall be effective on the date stated in the notice of decision, resolution, or ordinance. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).

19.09.100 Official case record.

The record of the public hearing or appeal hearing conducted by the hearing body for Type III and legislative reviews shall include, but need not be limited to, the following materials:

(a) The application or petition;

(b) The departmental staff reports;

(d) A statement of all matters officially noticed;

(e) A decision or a recommendation containing the findings and conclusions of the hearing body; and

(f) Any environmental determination made pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the town ordinances in furtherance of that act. (Ord. 1308 § 1 (part), 2009).