Chapter 14.08
APPLICATION REVIEW
Sections:
14.08.010 Application review criteria.
14.08.015 Determination by director.
14.08.020 Application review classification.
14.08.030 Limited administrative review of applications.
14.08.040 Full administrative review of applications.
14.08.050 Quasi-judicial review of applications.
14.08.060 Legislative review of applications.
14.08.070 Notice of final decision.
14.08.080 Exclusions from project permit application processing.
14.08.090 Administrative interpretations.
14.08.010 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 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 development regulations. In the absence of applicable development regulations, the applicable development criteria in the comprehensive plan or sub-area plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW shall be determinative. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.015 Determination by director.
The director or other official designated by the mayor shall determine the proper review procedure for all project permit applications. If there is a question as to the appropriate review procedure, the director shall resolve it in favor of the highest level of review. The act of classifying an application for review procedure shall be a limited administrative review action. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.020 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: limited administrative review, full administrative review, quasi-judicial review, and legislative review.
B. If this title or the city code provides that a proposed development is subject to a specific type of review, or that 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 hearing may be combined by the city with any public meeting or open record 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. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.030 Limited administrative review of applications.
Limited 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 exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Included within this type of review are interpretation of codes and ordinances, single-family building permits, temporary use permits and accessory dwelling units. The city may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application after the date the application is accepted as complete, without public notice. The decision of the city is final. There is no administrative appeal of a limited administrative review decision. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.040 Full administrative review of applications.
A. Full 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. Included within this type of review are short subdivisions, subdivisions, and site plan review, multifamily, commercial, industrial and/or office building permits.
B. The review procedure under full administrative review shall be as follows:
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.
2. Upon the completion of the public comment period and the comment period required by SEPA, if applicable, the city may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. The city shall mail the notice of decision to the applicant and all parties of record. The decision shall include:
a. A statement of the applicable criteria and standards in the development codes and other applicable law.
b. 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.
c. 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 law.
d. A statement that the decision is final unless appealed as provided in Chapter 14.10 RIMC, Appeals, to the hearing examiner within 14 calendar days after the date the notice of decision is mailed. The appeal closing date shall be listed. The statement shall describe how a party may appeal the decision, including applicable fees and the elements of a notice of appeal.
e. A statement that the complete case file, including findings, conclusions and conditions of approval, if any, is available for inspection. The notice shall list the place, days and times when the case file is available for inspection and the name and telephone number of the city’s representative to contact to arrange inspection.
3. The decision may be appealed to the hearing examiner pursuant to Chapter 14.10 RIMC, Appeals. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.050 Quasi-judicial review of applications.
A. Quasi-judicial review shall be used when the development or use proposed under the application requires a public hearing before a hearing body. This type of review shall be used for subdivisions, conditional use permits, planned residential developments, variances, and other similar applications.
B. The review procedure under quasi-judicial review shall be as follows:
1. A quasi-judicial review process requires an open record public hearing before the appropriate hearing body.
2. The public hearing shall be held after the completion of the public comment period and the comment period required by RIMC Title 18 (SEPA), if applicable.
3. At least 10 days before the date of a public hearing the city shall issue public notice of the date, time, location and purpose of the hearing.
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, which shall be made at least 15 days prior to any open record hearing, 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 and as set forth in Chapter 14.09 RIMC. A public hearing shall be recorded on either audio or audio-visual tape. If for any reason, the hearing cannot be completed on the date set in the public notice, it may be continued during the public hearing to a specified date, time and location, with further public notice made pursuant to RCW 42.30.100 by conspicuously posting a copy of the notice of continuance immediately after the time of the order of continuance on or near the door of the place where the public hearing was held.
6. Within 10 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 include:
a. A statement of the applicable criteria, standards and law;
b. A statement of the findings the hearing body made showing the proposal does or does not comply with each applicable approval criterion and assurance of compliance with applicable standards;
c. A statement that the decision is final unless appealed pursuant to Chapter 14.10 RIMC, Appeals, within 21 days of the issuance of the decision, as determined pursuant to Chapter 36.70C RCW. The appeal closing date shall be listed;
d. A statement that the complete case file, including findings, conclusions and conditions of approval, if any, is available for inspection. The notice shall list the place, days and times when the case file is available for inspection and the name and telephone number of the city representative to contact to arrange inspection. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.060 Legislative review of applications.
A. Legislative review shall be used when the proposed development involves the creation, implementation or amendment of city policy or law. In contrast to the other procedure types, legislative review usually applies to a relatively large geographic area containing several property owners. This type of review shall be used for comprehensive plan, sub-area plan, zoning and/or development code review, amendments and updates and site-specific zoning district reclassifications.
B. Legislative review shall be conducted as follows:
1. Legislative review requires at least one public hearing before the planning commission, if one exists, and one public meeting before the city council. If no planning commission exists, the public hearing(s) shall be held by the city council.
2. The application shall contain all information and material requirements required by the appropriate application form and any preapplication meeting.
3. At least 10 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. 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, which shall be made at least 15 days prior to any open record hearing, 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 and in accordance with RCW 36.70.630, the recommendation of the planning commission shall be forwarded to the city council. Upon receiving the recommendation from the planning commission, the city council shall set a public meeting to consider the proposal, at which the council may either accept or reject the recommendation.
6. The city council must hold a public hearing to consider any changes to the recommendation of the planning commission. The city council may approve, approve with conditions, deny or remand the proposal back to the planning commission for further review after such public hearing. The final decision of the council shall be adopted by ordinance.
7. The final decision of the city council shall be in writing and include:
a. A statement of the applicable criteria and law;
b. A statement of the findings indicating the application’s or proposed development’s compliance or noncompliance with each applicable approval criterion;
c. The decision to approve, condition or reject the planning commission recommendation or remand for further review;
d. A statement that the decision is final unless appealed pursuant to Chapter 14.10 RIMC, Appeals, within 21 days of the issuance of the decision, as determined pursuant to RCW 36.70C.040. The appeal closing date shall be listed.
e. A statement that the complete case file, including findings, conclusions and conditions of approval, if any, is available for inspection. The notice shall state the place, days and times when the case file is available for inspection and the name and telephone number of the city representative to contact to arrange inspection. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.070 Notice of final decision.
A. A notice of final decision on an application shall be issued within 120 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 14 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 90 days for open record appeals and 60 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 must issue a 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. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.080 Exclusions from project permit application processing.
A. The following permits or approvals are specifically excluded from the procedures set forth in this title:
1. Landmark designations;
2. Street vacations under Chapter 35.79 RCW;
3. Other approvals relating to the use of public areas; and
4. Other project permits, whether administrative or quasi-judicial that the city council has determined by resolution present special circumstances that warrant a different review process.
B. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.140(2), building permits, boundary line adjustments, other construction permits, or similar administrative approvals which are categorically exempt from environmental review under SEPA (Chapter 43.21C RCW) and RIMC Title 18 (SEPA), or permits/approvals for which environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits, are excluded from the following project permit processing procedures:
1. Notice of completeness;
2. Notice of application;
3. Except as provided in RCW 36.70B.140, optional consolidated project permit review processing;
4. Joint public hearings;
5. Single report stating all the decisions and recommendations made as of the date of the report that do not require an open record hearing;
6. Notice of decision;
7. Completion of project review within any time periods under RCW 36.70B.090 as now exists or as may be hereafter amended. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).
14.08.090 Administrative interpretations.
A decision as to the meaning, application or intent of any development regulation, as it relates to a specific piece of property may be requested by an applicant, staff, or a citizen at any time prior to a final decision on a project permit application to which the development regulation may be applied. The request shall be on a form provided by the responsible official and include identification of the regulation in question, a description of the property and a clear statement of the issue or question to be decided. The responsible official shall issue a written interpretation within a reasonable time, but no more than 14 working days after receipt of the completed form, and file a copy in a book or binder for such interpretations readily available to the public at City Hall. The responsible official shall be the mayor or his/her designee. (Ord. 99-026 § 1).